text:
PSS models, in particular the ‘result-oriented’ PSS, have the potential to align environmental and economic incentives. In theory, it would be in the interest of both producer and consumer to extend product lifetime and minimize life-cycle costs.
The term “second-life” refers to re-use, refurbish or remanufacture. In second-life circular paths, the product remains as a product or components. It is different from recycling, in which the product is disintegrated and recovered as raw materials.
In CIRCUSOL, second-life PV are used modules which are repaired, refurbished, or suitable for direct re-use; second-life batteries are retired EV batteries which are remanufactured for stationary applications such as PV storage.


text:
It has, unfortunately, been confirmed that the female body found in blue Ford Focus pulled Saturday from the North Branch of the Chicago River was indeed Irma Sabanovic, who modeled under the name Ira Blackbird.
My thoughts are with her family and friends during their time of loss, and I’d like to express my deepest condolences. I’m sure I speak for many when I say I was hoping for a different outcome–one in which she was found alive and well, after a misunderstanding of sorts. I hope you all find peace soon.

industry_corpus2: Others


text: 21st Century Award. Her work has been featured on NPR's Selected Shorts and adapted for the stage by Chicago's Steppenwolf Theater. Her debut novel, "We Only Know So Much,” has been adapted for film, and her second novel, "The History of Great Things,” was released in 2016. Her fourth collection of stories, "Turf,” is forthcoming in June from Soft Skull Press.

industry_corpus2: Literature & Emotions


text:
Well, I was trying to focus on my flossing goal and crunches but didn't do too well. I did do my crunches 2-3 times, but didn't floss at all. Been a busy week with sick kids and all. I didn't do quite a few goals very often. I'm going to keep trying this week though.
You have so many great goals you're working on. Some weeks are harder than others, especially when someone is sick. Good luck this week!
It's always harder when the kids are not feeling well. Have a good week, I hope everyone is feeling better!
Great goals- I have many of the same ones- However you might want to limit tv time too- I did this for a month -it is amazing what you can get done without it taking your energy away!
Your list has a lot of wonderful goals on it! Good luck this week with mastering them!


text: Stain resistant 3 piece casserole set, made from 100% food safe material, these containers are ideal for cooking, storing and serving food. It features a vented lid - open for cooking, close for freezing. Microwave oven safe to 200C.

industry_corpus2: Manufacturing


text:
To broadcast audio files just by touching the picture, you’ll need the following components - These components were designed for indoor use only.
The Audio Player IAP-1 is especially designed for a continuous 24/7 operation. Unlike PCs or HD-Players, the Audio Player IAP-1 can function entirely without loose or moveable parts such as fans or hard drives. We will fully configure the IAP-1 for broadcasting audio files whenever someone touches the picture. This doesn’t exclude the ability to setup the IAP-1 for other tasks.
The sensor is able to grow a touch sensitive field. If it is mounted behind a picture and somebody touches it, the sensor triggers the IAP-1, which then plays the audio file. This is how pictures can become alive. To make the whole picture touch sensitive, you need to stick the delivered copper foil behind it. This is how pictures can become alive.
To make the whole picture touch sensitive, you need to stick the delivered copper foil behind it.
The speaking picture also includes protective glass and a picture frame, which will be designed to fit for your needs.
The printed image will be produced of digital image files. These files will be provided by the costumer. Feel free to contact our technical support for further information.
Prices vary from 1620 € up to 1850 € (1927.80 € to 2201.50 € incl. VAT).

industry_corpus2: Computing & Telecommunications


text:
The Down Sus provides a lowered stance and improved handling to fulfill your needs to lower your car and improve its handling. Taking into consideration the factory suspension geometry, shock dampening, spring rate and ride height levels, RS-R ensures that the springs you are getting were made for your car both for performance and for comfort.
Follow RS-R USA around the web to keep up with our latest products and information.
Copyright © 2015 RS-R USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.

industry_corpus2: Automobiles


text:
From the bad to the really bad, bring it Wednesday, December 12 at 7:00 pm. Reach in the back of the closet or dig in the bins in the attic and find the ugliest sweater you can. If you are really feeling it, find a sweater at a thrift shop and spruce it for a unique ugly feel. It’s an all-out contest to see who can bring and wear it with pride, the ugliest sweater in North Texas.
Students from 7th – 12th grade will meet on Wednesday night for the last night before the New Year. Prizes will be given out for the ugliest sweaters. If you don’t have an ugly sweater, students are still invited to come and hang out.

industry_corpus2: Subject Education


text:
Erica V. Knowles is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of Collective Drift. Erica is a Miami native that enjoys participating in cultural events, celebrating the arts, attending local festivities, and travel. She is known for having a beautiful personality, her ability to help others communicate their message, and for connecting people.
Erica has professional experience that covers a wide range of industries including journalism, arts and culture, hosting, public speaking, fundraising, project management, event planning, social media, visual arts, financial services, city government policy, teaching, and pharmaceutical sales.
In the summer of 2011 Erica began her journey living abroad. While living in Lima and Bangkok she has had the amazing opportunity to visit North/East/West Africa, South East Asia, the Caribbean, Central America, Europe and South America including 30 countries.
Through her travels she has expanded her perception of self, others, how people perceive her, and how she affects others; furthermore, she has gained invaluable knowledge about multinational people and culture via direct experiences.
Within the past two years Erica has moved from being Legacy magazine’s Project Manager, to it’s Editor-in-Chief, and has re-launched and revamped MIA magazine as its Publisher and Editor-in-Chief. The diversity of her professional and life experiences allow her to take on new challenges comfortably and succeed.

industry_corpus2: Media & Journalism


text:
We have another beautiful Real Wedding to share with you. In January the stunning Fiona, married a kilt donned Ash in The Memorial Chapel at the University of Glasgow. They were surround by family and friends as they exchanged vows. The moments were caught beautifully on camera by Louise of No Middle Name.
Once the deal was done (and a tear or two shed) they headed off to The Tall Ship at Riverside.
Fiona sent me some great feedback about Paperless Wedding.
“We used the invitations and website option and several of our guests commented on how brilliant the whole system was. It meant that we could message everyone closer to the day as well, and we gave up to date information about the coach travel from the ceremony to the reception for example.
This was music to my ears as it is exactly what we hoped Paperless Wedding would be for our clients and their guests.
Fiona and Ash would like to thank all these lovely people who helped make their day extra special.
Make-up was Brienne @ Death by Lipsticks.
Flowers were Moody Cow Florist in Carluke.
Cake was by the Tea Jenny.
A big thank you to Fiona for sharing her wedding with us and for the great feedback. We wish you and Ash a lifetime of happiness.


text:
The following information will help you to understand the many technical terms and definitions associated with water damage restoration.
Category 1 – This category consists of water from a sanitary water source and poses no major health risks. Typically, category 1 water damage is the result of ruptured clean water. Once Category 1 water is released from its source, it can become contaminated and deteriorate to Category 2 or 3 water damage.
Category 2 – This water is contaminated and potentially harmful. Examples of Category water damage is typically “overflow” water from an appliance, toilet, aquarium or waterbed. As with Category 1, Category 2 water damage can further deteriorate and result in increased health risks.
Class of Water is determined by the probable rate of evaporation based on the materials affected by water damage. Identifying the Class of Water will help determine equipment required for effective water damage restoration.
Class 2 – This level affects an entire room, saturating permeable materials wicking up the walls at least 12” with moisture remaining in building materials. Class 2 water damage has a fast evaporation rate.
Class 3 – In this scenario; ceilings, walls, insulation, carpet and sub-floors are saturated. The water damage may have come from overhead and has the fastest evaporation rate.
Class 4 – This class consists of specialty drying situations, in which enough water has spilled and time elapsed to saturate materials with very low permeability such as hardwoods or masonry. In this instance, water damage restoration will be prolonged.
Whether the water damage restoration is done with a franchise independent water restoration services, it is of the utmost importance that the technician have the proper training and equipment to successfully complete the job.

industry_corpus2: Water Resources & Marine


text:
As PII, we are deeply saddened by the unfortunate events that recently appalled our nation, and we mourn for the innocent individuals and for the officers who were killed while doing their sacred duties for the people of this country.
We firmly believe, the claim that racial bias against the African-American community plays a role in law enforcement officers’ approach must be inquired, so that such tragedies may be prevented before happening.
The fact that there may be some officers in the Police Force who are careless in their treatment of people of color cannot shadow the heroism that they profess in their doing duty. As a nation, we have travelled a long way and must do better to institute the best practices that will reduce the reality of racial bias in every aspect of life in this country.
As PII, we hope to see that the divisiveness between some of the people of our country and our police force stops as soon as possible. Our nation must stand as one.

industry_corpus2: Law & Justice


text:
KF-235 PG2 is a slim 4-button keyfob that is used to arm and disarm, emergency signaling, panic alarm and viewing the system status.
KF-235 PG2 uses Visonic's ground-breaking PowerG technology which combines several field-proven advanced technologies and the highly reliable AES encryption method. When used in residential security systems, this combination of technologies delivers an extended transmission range and battery life, and unmatched advantages for professional installers, central monitoring stations and end-users alike.

industry_corpus2: Technology & Research


text:
Duct sealant is a simple-to-use duct sealant.
A duct sealant is a product that is used to fill in and close the seams and punctures in the ductwork used with most heating and cooling systems. The purpose of the sealant is to improve the efficiency of the unit by preventing the loss of hot or cold air from the ductwork. There are several different types of sealants, including tape, foam and aerosol products designed to create a tight seal that makes the system more efficient and more cost-effective.
There are several indications that the use of a duct sealant may be a good idea. This is especially true with air conditioning systems in both residential and commercial settings. Basically, if the room is too hot during the warm portion of the year, there may be cracks or leaks in the system that need to be sealed. At the same time, rooms that are too cold during the winter months may also be in need of treatment with some type of duct sealant.
One of the easiest types of duct sealant to use is mastic duct tape. Tape of this type can easily be used to seal around the junctions where sections of the ductwork join. Unlike some other methods, it is possible to apply the tape without spattering or other issues. Depending on the general climate, the tape may or may not adhere with the greatest degree of efficiency, making it necessary to replace it from time to time.
Another alternative with duct sealant is the use of some sort of aerosol product that can quickly be applied to the area of the puncture or over a seam. One of the benefits of this type of duct sealing compound is that it can often be applied in tight areas in which applying tape would be difficult. As the product settles, it helps to fill the gaps in the puncture or around the seam, effectively preventing the escape of air from the duct system while also preventing outside air from creeping into the ductwork.
Foam products are also a popular type of duct sealant. The foam can be successfully used when tape or aerosol products are not sufficient to manage the repairs needed to restore efficiency to the system. The foam can actually over the exterior of the ductwork, gradually solidifying into a shell that encases the entire section of the ductwork. Some products of this type will provide effective protection for the ducts for a number of years before another coating is required.
Keep in mind that a duct sealant can only accomplish so much. Severely damaged sections of ductwork may need to be replaced entirely. When that is the case, using some sort of sealant as part of the installation process will enhance the efficiency of the heating and cooling system, making it easier to enjoy a comfortable temperature inside while consuming less energy.
What is a Seam Sealant?
What are the Different Type of Duct Supplies?
What are the Different Types of Duct Equipment?
What are the Different Types of Sealant Tool?
What are the Different Types of Waterproof Sealant?

industry_corpus2: Power & Energy


text:
Design to make your Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn and yes, even to Snapchat to make your business look great socially!
Powerful images that provide insight on what your business is all about! A social presence is a presence that gathers people to a website, like a landing page if you will that normally updates.
We only provide insights for social media up front but we do offer social media account management for higher promotion.
E-Commerce tracking and promotions online are absolutely important. Keeping them on Social Media and using it correctly provides outstanding results!
We collect data from all of your sites and provide you one hundred percent confidential and insightful reports to generate better plans for your business.


text:
Software development company in siliguri, software development company in durgapur, software development company kolkata, software development company in delhi, software development company in malda, software development company in asansol, software development company in mumbai, software development company website template.
Our web based applications are scalable and range from corporate websites to large CRM based systems. To grow your business in today's competitive world you need unique, eye-catching well designed website that will carry your brand name.Professional approach, creative, artistic designers at AS Softech guide global clients confidentially by creating a unique design to respect the investment. Our web designing services are fully well planned to serve you user friendly, search engine friendly, progressive thinking and affordable website designing using our own high-technique. We understand that your website is your doorway to improve business opportunities, so AS Softech web designing team designs your website according to your exact requirement.
1.AS Softech always guides you to the right direction to develop the power of online E-commerce businesses to make more money and stay ahead of competition in today's dynamic market place. We provide a complete ecommerce solutions package from ecommerce website design-development to web marketing and customer-technical support.
4. Yellow Pages or Web Directory Development.
6. Social Networking Sites Development.
Related words: Software development company in siliguri, software development company in durgapur, software development company kolkata, software development company in delhi, software development company in malda, software development company in asansol, software development company in mumbai, software development company website template.


text:
AcutCare HIMS is a web based comprehensive solution that automates the clinical, administrative and supply-chain functions with one another.
It enables the healthcare providers to improve their operational effectiveness consequently.
It reduces costs and medical errors, while enhancing quality of care.
3- Bio-metric system based Finger print Reader & Time Accounting System.

industry_corpus2: Health & Medicine


text: Live at Rosa’s Blues Lounge You can still find the deep-rooted, hard swinging, rough and tumble blues that has inspired and moved generations of fans and musicians ever since the heyday of Chicago blues. Vocalist/songwriter/bandleader/harmonica player Little Arthur Duncan is one of the ‘must see’ artists for fans of the true, deep, lowdown blues. The music on this disc is raw and raucous and not very polished, but then Arthur’s music has never been about slickness – it’s about a good time, a deep blues feel, and above all a strong groove. So don’t spend a whole lot of time analyzing it – relax and enjoy good solid traditional Chicago blues played by some of the best in Chicago who still play it. With special guest Little Al Thomas. DVD special feature; Little Arthur commentary. Also available: Singin’ With The Sun (Delmark 733).

industry_corpus2: Film & Entertainment


text:
This post hasn’t got anything to do with baking, but I wanted to share my news. As well as baking, I’m also writing stories, my writers blog can be found here. My short story ‘Sister Replacement’ has been published, I’m really happy with this because just like with my baking I’ve found my love of creative writing again, and this acceptance has given me the confidence to continue writing and maybe write that novel that I dreamt about doing when I was a little girl. See below for details on my story.
Sister Replacement is a 2200 word horror short story, which deals with sibling relationships. This story idea came to me while observing my sibling relationship, and from that, I wondered what it would be like to be the younger sister rather than the older sister. So Amanda was born, she is a dramatic version of a younger sister and isn’t solely based on my sister. This story allowed me to explore different characters and their personalities rather than having them similar to my own. It was a challenge and I am happy with the result.
My story is published on Alfie Dog Fiction. If you would like to read this story, you can buy it here.
Sibling relationships can be turbulent, but after another feisty row with her older sister, Amanda is left longing to get rid of her. This leads to dire consequences for Amanda and a hard lesson to learn.


text: PHILADELPHIA | That was not fun. Or entertaining. Or promising. Or anything positive. It was a three-hour ordeal, the Chiefs' venture into Lincoln Financial Field, which ended with a 34-14 Eagles victory.

industry_corpus2: Sports


text:
The Instant Pot, a sleek, easy-to-use, completely programmable pressure cooker, is the newest favorite tool of home cooks everywhere. Whether you’ve had your Instant Pot for a while, or you’re just getting started, these five hacks will help you get the most out of your Instant Pot.
Zero minutes for vegetables: Vegetables steamed in the Instant Pot maintain flavor and vitamins lost in stovetop boiling or steaming. But even three minutes cooking under pressure is too much for some of the more delicate vegetables like asparagus, haricot vert, and broccoli rabe. The answer is to set your pot to cook for 0 minutes. The Instant Pot will come up to pressure then immediately shut off. Follow that with quick venting, and you should end up with crisp, delicious veggies every time.
Venting meats: Instant Pot recipes aren’t consistent about whether meat dishes should be quick vented or allowed to vent naturally. But regardless of what the recipe says, any piece of meat you would have slow cooked or braised before you got your Instant Pot–roasts, short ribs, shoulders, stews–ought to be naturally vented, a process that could take up to 45 minutes. The meat will continue to cook during this cooling-down time, which should serve to make it that much more tender. Quick venting will mean your meal will be on the table quicker, but with the larger, tougher pieces of meat, it can also draw water out of the final dish, leaving it chewy and dry.
Foil on cakes: You’ve probably figured out by now that you can steam cook a moist and delicious cake in the Instant Pot. Make those unique desserts even better by laying a piece of tin foil loosely over the cake when you put in the pot. That will keep the water that inevitably collects on the lid of the Instant Pot from dripping into your cake and making it mushy.
Avoiding foam geysers: Certain starchy dishes like pasta, rice, potatoes, or stews can foam up during the intense boiling that follows pressurized cooking. If you try to quick release right away, you could end up spewing hot cooking liquids into the air and over the side of your machine. Avoid this by filling the Instant Pot not more than halfway with such meals. Also, allow the dish to naturally vent, if you can without overcooking. If that’s not possible, allow at least five minutes for the pot to cool naturally, then vent the steam in short burst rather than a long stream, all of which should serve to keep the foamy mess from covering your kitchen.
White vinegar cleanse: To easily degrease and deodorize your Instant Pot, place two cups of white vinegar, or one cup of water and one of vinegar in the pot, cook at high pressure for five minutes, let vent naturally for five minutes, and quick release the rest of the steam. The vinegar will reach into every crevice to eliminate the smells of past meals that can cling to the pot.
Serious home cooks everywhere are turning to the Instant Pot for meals that are quick, convenient, healthy, and flavorful. And though the Instant Pot is incredibly easy to use, there are still tricks you can learn to make it work even better for you. These five tips should help you get the most out of this essential kitchen tool.
If you’re looking for accessories for your instant pot cooker, these simple-to-use, instant pot friendly steamer baskets are ideal for cooking vegetables, meat or fruit.

industry_corpus2: Hospitality & Catering


text:
Hi bloggers, Barbara back today with a calendar page from the 2018 Papermilldirect calendar.
These are perfect for personalising with photos, stamping, & stencilling etc, to correspond with the month of the year.
I used a piece of white 'hopsack' 5" deep, by the complete width of the calendar.
This was inked with Distress Oxides, in Cracked Pistachio, Peacock Feathers & Lucky clover......then splashed with water to give a 'sea' effect.
I stencilled some bubbles using a stencil from Inkylicious, and filled them with Ranger, Glossy Accents.
I lightly brushed over the stencilling with an ink pad.
Because I knew the stencilling would add extra weight to the piece of hopsack, I mounted the whole piece onto black smooth card, then adhered to the calendar.
The 2019 Calendars will be available soon......I'm going to buy a few to personalise for my family, as gifts.


text: Oversized corner building lot in Section 51 with adjacent lot to be sold with it, both lots for $23,000. Quick access to Toledo Blade which allows access to I-75 to the north for commute to either Sarosata or Fort Myers, or access to I-41 to the south for easy access to shopping in Port Charlotte or North Port. Area of newer homes. Perfect location for raising a family or that retirement home.

industry_corpus2: Real Estate & Construction


text:
Most States ban multiple party, or "fusion," candidacies for elected office. Minnesota's laws prohibit an individual from appearing on the ballot as the candidate of more than one party. When respondent, a chapter of the national New Party, chose as its candidate for state representative an individual who was already the candidate of another political party, local election officials refused to accept the New Party's nominating petition. The Party filed suit against petitioners, Minnesota election officials, contending that the State's antifusion laws violated its associational rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The District Court granted petitioners summary judgment, but the Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the fusion ban was unconstitutional because it severely burdened the Party's associational rights and was not narrowly tailored to advance Minnesota's valid interests in avoiding intraparty discord and party splintering, maintaining a stable political system, and avoiding voter confusion.
Held: Minnesota's fusion ban does not violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Pp. 3-19.
(a) While the First Amendment protects the right of citizens to associate and to form political parties for the advancement of common political goals and ideas, Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Comm. v. Federal Election Comm., 518 U. S. ___, ___, States may enact reasonable regulations of parties, elections, and ballots to reduce election and campaign related disorder, Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428, 433 . When deciding whether a state election law violates Firstand Fourteenth Amendment associational rights, this Court must weigh the character and magnitude of the burden the State's rule imposes on those rights against the interests the State contends justify that burden, and consider the extent to which the State's concerns make the burden necessary. Id., at 434. Regulations imposing severe burdens must be narrowly tailored and advance a compelling state interest. Lesser burdens, however, trigger less exacting review, and a State's important regulatory interests will usually be enough to justify reasonable, nondiscriminatory restrictions. Ibid. No bright line separates permissible election related regulation from unconstitutional infringements on First Amendment freedoms. Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724, 730 . Pp. 3-7.
(b) Minnesota's fusion ban does not severely burden the New Party's associational rights. The State's laws do not restrict the ability of the Party and its members to endorse, support, or vote for anyone they like or directly limit the Party's access to the ballot. The Party's preferred candidate will still appear on the ballot, although as another party's candidate. The laws are also silent on parties' internal structure, governance, and policy making. Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Comm., 489 U.S. 214 , and Tashjian v. Republican Party of Conn., 479 U.S. 208 , distinguished. Instead, these provisions reduce the universe of potential candidates who may appear on the ballot as the Party's nominee and limit, slightly, the Party's ability to send a particularized message, to its candidate and to the voters, about the nature of its support for the candidate. However, ballots are designed primarily to elect candidates, not to serve as fora for political expression. See Burdick, supra, at 438. Pp. 7-12.
(c) Because Minnesota's fusion ban does not impose a severe burden on the New Party's rights, the State is required to show, not that the ban was narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests, but that the State's asserted regulatory interests are "sufficiently weighty to justify the limitation" on the Party's rights. Norman v. Reed, 502 U.S. 279, 288 -289. Elaborate, empirical verification of weightiness is not required. See Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189, 195 -196. Here, the burden is justified by "correspondingly weighty" valid state interests in ballot integrity and political stability. States certainly have an interest in protecting the integrity, fairness, and efficiency of their ballots and election processes as means for electing public officials. E.g., Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134, 145 . Minnesota fears that a candidate or party could easily exploit fusion as a way of associating his or its name with popular slogans and catchphrases, transforming the ballot from a means of choosing candidates to a billboard for political advertising. It is also concerned that fusion might enable minor parties, by nominating a major party's candidate,to bootstrap their way to major party status in the next election and circumvent the State's nominating petition requirement for minor parties, which is designed to ensure that only bona fide minor and third parties are granted access to the ballot. The State's strong interest in the stability of its political systems, see, e.g., Eu, supra, at 226, does not permit it to completely insulate the two party system from minor parties' or independent candidates' competition and influence, e.g., Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780, 802 , and is not a paternalistic license for States to protect political parties from the consequences of their own internal disagreements, e.g., Eu, supra, at 227. However, it does permit the State to enact reasonable election regulations that may, in practice, favor the traditional two party system. Minnesota's fusion ban is far less burdensome than a California law, upheld in Storer, 415 U.S., at 728 , that denied ballot positions to any independent candidate affiliated with a party at any time during the year preceding the primary election, and it is justified by similarly weighty state interests. The Court expresses no view on the Party's policy based arguments concerning the wisdom of fusion. Pp. 12-19.
73 F. 3d 196, reversed.
Rehnquist, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Stevens, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined, and in Parts I and II of which Souter, J., joined. Souter, J., filed a dissenting opinion.
Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Most States prohibit multiple party, or "fusion," candidacies for elected office. 1 The Minnesota laws challenged in this case prohibit a candidate from appearing on the ballot as the candidate of more than one party. Minn. Stat. §§204B.06, subd. 1(b) and 204B.04, subd. 2 (1994). We hold that such a prohibition does not violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
The New Party filed suit in United States District Court, contending that Minnesota's antifusion laws violated the Party's associational rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The District Court granted summary judgment for the state defendants, concluding that Minnesota's fusion ban was "a valid and non discriminatory regulation of the election process", and noting that "issues concerning the mechanics of choosing candidates . . . are, in large part, matters of policy best left to the deliberative bodies themselves." Twin Cities Area New Party v. McKenna, 863 F. Supp.988, 994 (D. Minn. 1994).
The Court of Appeals reversed. Twin Cities Area New Party v. McKenna, 73 F. 3d 196, 198 (CA8 1996). First, the court determined that Minnesota's fusion ban "unquestionably" and "severe[ly]" burdened the New Party's "freedom to select a standard bearer who best represents the party's ideologies and preferences" and its right to "broaden the base of public participation in and support for [its] activities." Ibid. (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). The court then decided that Minnesota's absolute ban on multiple party nominations was "broader than necessary to serve the State's asserted interests" in avoiding intraparty discord and party splintering, maintaining a stable political system, and avoiding voter confusion, and that the State's remaining concerns about multiple party nomination were "simply unjustified in this case." Id., at 199-200. The court noted, however, that the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had upheld Wisconsin's similar fusion ban in Swamp v. Kennedy, 950 F. 2d 383, 386 (1991) (fusion ban did not burden associational rights and, even if it did, the State's interests justified the burden), cert. denied, 505 U.S. 1204 (1992). Nonetheless, the court concluded that Minnesota's fusion ban provisions, Minn. Stat. §§204B.06, subd. 1(b) and 204B.04, subd. 2 (1994), were unconstitutional because they severely burdened the New Party's associational rights and were not narrowly tailored to advance Minnesota's valid interests. We granted certiorari, 517 U. S. ___ (1996), and now reverse.
Fusion was a regular feature of Gilded Age American politics. Particularly in the West and Midwest, candidates of issue oriented parties like the Grangers, Independents, Greenbackers, and Populists often succeeded through fusion with the Democrats, and vice versa. Republicans, for their part, sometimes arranged fusion candidacies in the South, as part of a generalstrategy of encouraging and exploiting divisions within the dominant Democratic Party. See generally Argersinger, "A Place at the Table": Fusion Politics and Antifusion Laws, 85 Amer. Hist. Rev. 287, 288-290 (1980).
The First Amendment protects the right of citizens to associate and to form political parties for the advancement of common political goals and ideas. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Comm. v. Federal Election Comm., 518 U. S. ___, ___ (1996) (slip op., at 9) ("The independent expression of a political party's views is `core' First Amendment activity no less than is the independent expression of individuals, candidates, or other political committees"); Norman v. Reed, 502 U.S. 279, 288 (1992) ("[C]onstitutional right of citizens to create and develop new political parties. . . . advances the constitutional interest of like minded voters to gather in pursuit of common political ends"); Tashjian v. Republican Party of Conn., 479 U.S. 208, 214 (1986). As a result, political parties' government, structure, and activities enjoy constitutional protection. Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 230 (1989) (noting political party's "discretion in how to organize itself, conduct its affairs, and select its leaders"); Tashjian, supra, at 224 (Constitution protectsa party's "determination . . . of the structure which best allows it to pursue its political goals").
On the other hand, it is also clear that States may, and inevitably must, enact reasonable regulations of parties, elections, and ballots to reduce election and campaign related disorder. Burdick, supra, at 433 ("`[A]s a practical matter, there must be a substantial regulation of elections if they are to be fair and honest and if some sort of order, rather than chaos, is to accompany the democratic process'") (quoting Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724, 730 (1974)); Tashjian, supra, at 217 (The Constitution grants States "broad power to prescribe the `Time, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives,' Art. I, §4, cl. 1, which power is matched by state control over the election process for state offices").
When deciding whether a state election law violates First and Fourteenth Amendment associational rights, we weigh the "`character and magnitude'" of the burden the State's rule imposes on those rights against the interests the State contends justify that burden, and consider the extent to which the State's concerns make the burden necessary. Burdick, supra, at 434 (quoting Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780, 789 (1983)). Regulations imposing severe burdens on plaintiffs' rights must be narrowly tailored and advance a compelling state interest. Lesser burdens, however, trigger less exacting review, and a State's "`important regulatory interests'" will usually be enough to justify "`reasonable, nondiscriminatory restrictions.'" Burdick, supra, at 434 (quoting Anderson, supra, at 788); Norman, supra, at 288-289 (requiring "corresponding interest sufficiently weighty to justify the limitation"). No bright line separates permissible election related regulation from unconstitutional infringements on First Amendment freedoms. Storer, supra, at 730 ("[N]o litmus paper test . . . separat[es] those restrictions that are valid fromthose that are invidious . . . . The rule is not self executing and is no substitute for the hard judgments that must be made").
The New Party's claim that it has a right to select its own candidate is uncontroversial, so far as it goes. See, e.g., Cousins v. Wigoda, 419 U.S. 477 (1975) (Party, not State, has right to decide who will be State's delegates at party convention). That is, the New Party, and not someone else, has the right to select the New Party's "standard bearer." It does not follow, though, that a party is absolutely entitled to have its nominee appear on the ballot as that party's candidate. A particular candidate might be ineligible for office, 8 unwilling to serve, or, as here, another party's candidate. That a particular individual may not appear on the ballot as a particular party's candidate does not severely burden that party's association rights. See Burdick, 504 U.S., at 440 , n. 10 ("It seems to us that limiting the choice of candidates to those who have complied with state election law requirements is the prototypical example of a regulation that, while it affects the right to vote, is eminently reasonable"); Anderson, 460 U.S., at 792 , n. 12 ("Although a disaffiliation provision may preclude . . . voters from supporting a particular ineligible candidate, they remain free to support and promote other candidates who satisfy the State's disaffiliation requirements"); id., at 793, n. 15.
The New Party relies on Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Comm., supra, and Tashjian v. Republican Party of Conn., supra. In Eu, we struck down California election provisions that prohibited political parties from endorsing candidates in partyprimaries and regulated parties' internal affairs and structure. And in Tashjian, we held that Connecticut's closed primary statute, which required voters in a party primary to be registered party members, interfered with a party's associational rights by limiting "the group of registered voters whom the Party may invite to participate in the basic function of selecting the Party's candidates." 479 U.S., at 215 -216 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). But while Tashjian and Eu involved regulation of political parties' internal affairs and core associational activities, Minnesota's fusion ban does not. The ban, which applies to major and minor parties alike, simply precludes one party's candidate from appearing on the ballot, as that party's candidate, if already nominated by another party. Respondent is free to try to convince Representative Dawkins to be the New Party's, not the DFL's, candidate. See Swamp, 950 F. 2d, at 385 ("[A] party may nominate any candidate that the party can convince to be its candidate"). Whether the Party still wants to endorse a candidate who, because of the fusion ban, will not appear on the ballot as the Party's candidate, is up to the Party.
The Court of Appeals also held that Minnesota's laws "keep the New Party from developing consensual political alliances and thus broadening the base of public participation in and support for its activities." McKenna, 73 F. 3d, at 199. The burden on the Party was, the court held, severe because "[h]istory shows that minor parties have played a significant role in the electoral system where multiple party nomination is legal, but have no meaningful influence where multiple party nomination is banned." Ibid. In the view of the Court of Appeals, Minnesota's fusion ban forces members of the new party to make a "no win choice" between voting for "candidates with no realistic chance of winning, defect[ing] from their party and vot[ing] for amajor party candidate who does, or declin[ing] to vote at all." Ibid.
But Minnesota has not directly precluded minor political parties from developing and organizing. Cf. Norman, 502 U.S., at 289 (statute "foreclose[d] the development of any political party lacking the resources to run a statewide campaign"). Nor has Minnesota excluded a particular group of citizens, or a political party, from participation in the election process. Cf. Anderson, supra, at 792-793 (filing deadline "places a particular burden on an identifiable segment of Ohio's independent minded voters"); Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134 (1972) (striking down Texas statute requiring candidates to pay filing fees as a condition to having their names placed on primary election ballots). The New Party remains free to endorse whom it likes, to ally itself with others, to nominate candidates for office, and to spread its message to all who will listen. Cf. Eu, 489 U.S., at 223 (California law curtailed right to "[f]ree discussion about candidates for public office"); Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Comm'n, 518 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 8) (restrictions on party's spending impair its ability to "engage in direct political advocacy").
The Court of Appeals emphasized its belief that, without fusion based alliances, minor parties cannot thrive. This is a predictive judgment which is by no means self evident. 9 But, more importantly, the supposed benefits of fusion to minor parties does not require that Minnesota permit it. See Tashjian, supra, at 222 (refusing to weigh merits of closed and open primaries). Many features of our political system--e.g., single member districts, "first past the post" elections, and the high costs of campaigning--make it difficult for third parties to succeed in American politics. Burnham Declaration, App. 12-13. But the Constitution does not require States to permit fusion any more than it requires them to move to proportional representation elections or public financing of campaigns. See Mobile v. Bolden, 446 U.S. 55, 75 (1980) (plurality opinion) ("Whatever appeal the dissenting opinion's view may have as a matter of political theory, it is not the law").
The New Party contends that the fusion ban burdens its "right . . . to communicate its choice of nominees on the ballot on terms equal to those offered other parties, and the right of the party's supporters and other voters to receive that information," and insists that communication on the ballot of a party's candidate choice is a "critical source of information for the great majority of voters . . . who . . . rely upon party `labels' as a voting guide." Brief for Respondent 22-23.
It is true that Minnesota's fusion ban prevents the New Party from using the ballot to communicate to the public that it supports a particular candidate who isalready another party's candidate. In addition, the ban shuts off one possible avenue a party might use to send a message to its preferred candidate because, with fusion, a candidate who wins an election on the basis of two parties' votes will likely know more--if the parties' votes are counted separately--about the particular wishes and ideals of his constituency. We are unpersuaded, however, by the Party's contention that it has a right to use the ballot itself to send a particularized message, to its candidate and to the voters, about the nature of its support for the candidate. Ballots serve primarily to elect candidates, not as fora for political expression. See Burdick, 504 U.S., at 438 ; id., at 445 (Kennedy, J., dissenting). Like all parties in Minnesota, the New Party is able to use the ballot to communicate information about itself and its candidate to the voters, so long as that candidate is not already someone else's candidate. The Party retains great latitude in its ability to communicate ideas to voters and candidates through its participation in the campaign, and Party members may campaign for, endorse, and vote for their preferred candidate even if he is listed on the ballot as another party's candidate. See Anderson, 460 U.S., at 788 ("[A]n election campaign is an effective platform for the expression of views on the issues of the day"); Illinois Bd. of Elections v. Socialist Workers Party, 440 U.S. 173, 186 (1979) ("[A]n election campaign is a means of disseminating ideas").
In sum, Minnesota's laws do not restrict the ability of the New Party and its members to endorse, support, or vote for anyone they like. The laws do not directly limit the Party's access to the ballot. They are silent on parties' internal structure, governance, and policy making. Instead, these provisions reduce the universe of potential candidates who may appear on the ballot as the Party's nominee only by ruling out those few individuals who both have already agreed to be another party'scandidate and also, if forced to choose, themselves prefer that other party. They also limit, slightly, the Party's ability to send a message to the voters and to its preferred candidates. We conclude that the burdens Minnesota imposes on the Party's First and Fourteenth Amendment associational rights--though not trivial--are not severe.
The Court of Appeals determined that Minnesota's fusion ban imposed "severe" burdens on the New Party's associational rights, and so it required the State to show that the ban was narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests. McKenna, 73 F. 3d, at 198. We disagree; given the burdens imposed, the bar is not so high. Instead, the State's asserted regulatory interests need only be "sufficiently weighty to justify the limitation" imposed on the Party's rights. Norman, 502 U.S., at 288 -289; Burdick, supra, at 434 (quoting Anderson, supra, at 788). Nor do we require elaborate, empirical verification of the weightiness of the State's asserted justifications. See Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189, 195 -196 (1986) ("Legislatures . . . should be permitted to respond to potential deficiencies in the electoral process with foresight rather than reactively, provided that the response is reasonable and does not significantly impinge on constitutionally protected rights").
The Court of Appeals acknowledged Minnesota's interests in avoiding voter confusion and overcrowded ballots, preventing party splintering and disruptions of the two party system, and being able to clearly identify the election winner. McKenna, supra, at 199-200. Similarly, the Seventh Circuit, in Swamp, noted Wisconsin's "compelling" interests in avoiding voter confusion, preserving the integrity of the election process, and maintaining a stable political system. Id., at 386; cf. id., at 387-388 (Fairchild, J., concurring) (State has a compelling interest in "maintaining the distinct identityof parties"). Minnesota argues here that its fusion ban is justified by its interests in avoiding voter confusion, promoting candidate competition (by reserving limited ballot space for opposing candidates), preventing electoral distortions and ballot manipulations, and discouraging party splintering and "unrestrained factionalism." Brief for Petitioners 41-50.
States certainly have an interest in protecting the integrity, fairness, and efficiency of their ballots and election processes as means for electing public officials. Bullock, 405 U.S., at 145 (State may prevent "frivolous or fraudulent candidacies") (citing Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431, 442 (1971)); Eu, 489 U.S., at 231 ; Norman, supra, at 290 (States have an interest in preventing "misrepresentation"); Rosario v. Rockefeller, 410 U.S. 752, 761 (1973). Petitioners contend that a candidate or party could easily exploit fusion as a way of associating his or its name with popular slogans and catchphrases. For example, members of a major party could decide that a powerful way of "sending a message" via the ballot would be for various factions of that party to nominate the major party's candidate as the candidate for the newly formed "No New Taxes," "Conserve Our Environment," and "Stop Crime Now" parties. In response, an opposing major party would likely instruct its factions to nominate that party's candidate as the "Fiscal Responsibility," "Healthy Planet," and "Safe Streets" parties' candidate.
Whether or not the putative "fusion" candidates' names appeared on one or four ballot lines, such maneuvering would undermine the ballot's purpose by transforming it from a means of choosing candidates to a billboard for political advertising. The New Party responds to this concern, ironically enough, by insisting that the State could avoid such manipulation by adopting more demanding ballot access standards rather than prohibiting multiple party nomination. Brief for Respondent, 38. However, as we stated above, because the burdens the fusion ban imposes on the Party's associational rights are not severe, the State need not narrowly tailor the means it chooses to promote ballot integrity. The Constitution does not require that Minnesota compromise the policy choices embodied in its ballot access requirements to accommodate the New Party's fusion strategy. See Minn. Stat. §204B.08, subd. 3 (1994) (signature requirements for nominating petitions); Rosario, supra, at 761-762 (New York's time limitation for enrollment in a political party was part of an overall scheme aimed at the preservation of the integrity of the State's electoral process).
Relatedly, petitioners urge that permitting fusion would undercut Minnesota's ballot access regime by allowing minor parties to capitalize on the popularity of another party's candidate, rather than on their own appeal to the voters, in order to secure access to the ballot. Brief for Petitioners 45-46. That is, voters who might not sign a minor party's nominating petition based on the party's own views and candidates might do so if they viewed the minor party as just another way of nominating the same person nominated by one of the major parties. Thus, Minnesota fears that fusion would enable minor parties, by nominating a major party's candidate, to bootstrap their way to major party status in the next election and circumvent the State's nominating petition requirement for minor parties. See Minn. Stat. §§200.02, subd. 7 (defining "major party") and §204D.13 (describing ballot order for major and other parties). The State surely has a valid interest in making sure that minor and third parties who are granted access to the ballot are bona fide and actually supported, on their own merits, by those who have provided the statutorily required petition or ballot support. Anderson, 460 U.S., at 788 , n. 9; Storer, 415 U.S., at 733 , 746.
States also have a strong interest in the stability of their political systems. 10 Eu, supra, at 226; Storer, supra, at 736. This interest does not permit a State to completely insulate the two party system from minor parties' or independent candidates' competition and influence, Anderson, supra, at 802; Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (1968), nor is it a paternalistic license for States to protect political parties from the consequences of their own internal disagreements. Eu, supra, at 227; Tashjian, 479 U.S., at 224 . That said, the States' interest permits them to enact reasonable election regulations that may, in practice, favor the traditional two party system, see Burnham Declaration, App. 12 (American politics has been, for the most part, organized around two parties since the time of Andrew Jackson), and that temper the destabilizing effects of party splintering and excessive factionalism. The Constitution permits the Minnesota Legislature to decide that political stability is best served through a healthy two party system. See Rutan v. Republican Party of Ill., 497 U.S. 62, 107 (1990) (Scalia, J., dissenting) ("The stabilizing effects of such a [two party] system are obvious"); Davis v. Bandemer, 478 U.S. 109, 144 -145(1986) (O'Connor, J., concurring) ("There can be little doubt that the emergence of a strong and stable two party system in this country has contributed enormously to sound and effective government"); Branti v. Finkel, 445 U.S. 507, 532 (1980) (Powell, J., dissenting) ("Broad based political parties supply an essential coherence and flexibility to the American political scene"). And while an interest in securing the perceived benefits of a stable two party system will not justify unreasonably exclusionary restrictions, see Williams, supra, at 31-32, States need not remove all of the many hurdles third parties face in the American political arena today.
Our decision in Burdick v. Takushi, supra, is also relevant. There, we upheld Hawaii's ban on write in voting against a claim that the ban unreasonably infringed on citizens' First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. In so holding, we rejected the petitioner's argument that the ban "deprive[d] him of the opportunity to cast a meaningful ballot," emphasizing that the function of elections is to elect candidates and that "we have repeatedly upheld reasonable, politically neutral regulations that have the effect of channeling expressive activit[ies] at the polls." 504 U.S., at 437 -438.
Minnesota's fusion ban is far less burdensome than the disaffiliation rule upheld in Storer, and is justifiedby similarly weighty state interests. By reading Storer as dealing only with "sore loser candidates," the dissent, in our view, fails to appreciate the case's teaching. Post, at 8 (Stevens, J., dissenting). Under the California disaffiliation statute at issue in Storer, any person affiliated with a party at any time during the year leading up to the primary election was absolutely precluded from appearing on the ballot as an independent or as the candidate of another party. Minnesota's fusion ban is not nearly so restrictive; the challenged provisions say nothing about the previous party affiliation of would be candidates but only require that, in order to appear on the ballot, a candidate not be the nominee of more than one party. California's disaffiliation rule limited the field of candidates by thousands; Minnesota's precludes only a handful who freely choose to be so limited. It is also worth noting that while California's disaffiliation statute absolutely banned many candidacies, Minnesota's fusion ban only prohibits a candidate from being named twice.
We conclude that the burdens Minnesota's fusion ban imposes on the New Party's associational rights are justified by "correspondingly weighty" valid state interests in ballot integrity and political stability. 13 In deciding that Minnesota's fusion ban does not unconstitutionally burden the New Party's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, we express no views on the New Party's policy based arguments concerning the wisdom of fusion. It may well be that, as support for new politicalparties increases, these arguments will carry the day in some States' legislatures. But the Constitution does not require Minnesota, and the approximately 40 other States that do not permit fusion, to allow it. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed.
Justice Stevens , with whom Justice Ginsburg joins, In Minnesota, the Twin Cities Area New Party (Party), is a recognized minor political party entitled by state law to have the names of its candidates for public office appear on the state ballots. In April, 1994, Andy Dawkins was qualified to be a candidate for election to the Minnesota Legislature as the representative of House District 65A. With Dawkins's consent, the Party nominated him as its candidate for that office. In my opinion the Party and its members had a constitutional right to have their candidate's name appear on the ballot despite the fact that he was also the nominee of another party.
The Court's conclusion that the Minnesota statute prohibiting multiple party candidacies is constitutional rests on three dubious premises: (1) that the statute imposes only a minor burden on the Party's right to choose and to support the candidate of its choice; (2) that the statute significantly serves the State's asserted interests in avoiding ballot manipulation and factionalism; and (3) that, in any event, the interest in preserving the two party system justifies the imposition of the burden at issue in this case. I disagree with each of these premises.
The members of a recognized political party unquestionably have a constitutional right to select their nominees for public office and to communicate the identity of their nominees to the voting public. Both the right to choose and the right to advise voters of that choice are entitled to the highest respect.
The Minnesota statutes place a significant burden on both of those rights. The Court's recital of burdens that the statute does not inflict on the Party, ante, at 11-12, does nothing to minimize the severity of the burdens that it does impose. The fact that the Party may nominate its second choice surely does not diminish the significance of a restriction that denies it the right to have the name of its first choice appear on the ballot. Nor does the point that it may use some of its limited resources to publicize the fact that its first choice is the nominee of some other party provide an adequate substitute for the message that is conveyed to every person who actually votes when a party's nominees appear on the ballot.
As to the first point, the State contends that the fusion ban in fact limits by only a few candidates the range of individuals a party may nominate, and that the burden is therefore quite small. But the number of candidates removed from the Party's reach cannot be the determinative factor. The ban leaves the Party free to nominate any eligible candidate except the particular " `standard bearer who best represents the party's ideologies and preferences.' " Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 224 (1989).
The Party could perhaps choose to expend its resources supporting a candidate who was not in fact the best representative of its members' views. But a party's choice of a candidate is the most effective way in which that party can communicate to the voters what the party represents and, thereby, attract voter interest and support. 1 Political parties "exist to advance their members' shared political beliefs," and "in the context of particular elections, candidates are necessary to make the party's message known and effective, and vice versa." Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Comm. v. Federal Election Comm'n, 518 U. S. ___, ___ (1996) (slip op., at 4) (Kennedy, J., dissenting). See also Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780, 821 (1983) (Rehnquist, J., dissenting) ("Political parties have, or at least hope to have, a continuing existence, representing particular philosophies. Each party has an interest in finding the best candidate to advance its philosophy ineach election").
The State next argues that--instead of nominating a second choice candidate--the Party could remove itself from the ballot altogether, and publicly endorse the candidate of another party. But the right to be on the election ballot is precisely what separates a political party from any other interest group. 2 The Court relies on the fact that the New Party remains free "to spread its message to all who will listen," ante, at 9, through fora other than the ballot. Given the limited resources available to most minor parties, and the less than universal interest in the messages of third parties, it is apparent that the Party's message will, in this manner, reach a much smaller audience than that composed of all voters who can read the ballot in the polling booth.
The majority rejects as unimportant the limits that the fusion ban may impose on the Party's ability to express its political views, ante, at 10-11, relying on our decision in Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428, 445 (1992), in which we noted that "the purpose of casting, counting, and recording votes is to elect public officials, not to serve as a general forum for political expression." But in Burdick we concluded simply that an individual voter's interest in expressing his disapproval of the single candidate running for office in a particular election did not require the State to finance and provide a mechanism for tabulating write in votes. Our conclusion that the ballot is not principally a forum for the individual expression of political sentiment through the casting of a vote does not justify the conclusion that theballot serves no expressive purpose for the parties who place candidates on the ballot. Indeed, the long recognized right to choose a " `standard bearer who best represents the party's ideologies and preferences,' " Eu, 489 U.S., at 224 , is inescapably an expressive right. "To the extent that party labels provide a shorthand designation of the views of party candidates on matters of public concern, the identification of candidates with particular parties plays a role in the process by which voters inform themselves for the exercise of the franchise." Tashjian v. Republican Party of Conn., 479 U.S. 208, 220 (1986).
In this case, and presumably in most cases, the burden of a statute of this kind is imposed upon the members of a minor party, but its potential impact is much broader. Popular candidates like Andy Dawkins sometimes receive nation wide recognition. Fiorello LaGuardia, Earl Warren, Ronald Reagan, and Franklin D. Roosevelt, are names that come readily to mind as candidates whose reputations and political careers were enhanced because they appeared on election ballots as fusion candidates. See Note, Fusion and the Associational Rights of Minor Parties, 95 Colum. L. Rev. 683, 683 (1995). A statute that denied a political party the right to nominate any of those individuals for high office simply because he had already been nominated by another party would, in my opinion, place an intolerable burden on political expression and association.
Minnesota argues that the statutory restriction on the New Party's right to nominate the candidate of its choice is justified by the State's interests in avoiding voter confusion, preventing ballot clutter and manipulation, encouraging candidate competition, and minimizing intraparty factionalism. None of these rationales can support the fusion ban because the State has failed toexplain how the ban actually serves the asserted interests.
While the State describes some imaginative theoretical sources of voter confusion that could result from fusion candidacies, in my judgment the argument that the burden on First Amendment interests is justified by this concern is meritless and severely underestimates the intelligence of the typical voter. 4 We have noted more than once that "[a] State's claim that it is enhancing the ability of its citizenry to make wise decisions by restricting the flow of information to them must be viewed with some skepticism." Eu, 489 U.S., at 228 ; Tashjian, 479 U.S., at 221 ; Anderson, 460 U.S., at 798 .
The State argues that the fusion ban promotes political stability by preventing intraparty factionalism and party raiding. States do certainly have an interest in maintaining a stable political system. Eu, 489 U.S., at 226 . But the State has not convincingly articulated how the fusion ban will prevent the factionalism it fears. Unlike the law at issue in Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724 (1974), for example, this law would not prevent sore loser candidates from defecting with a disaffected segment of a major party and running as an opposition candidate for a newly formed minor party. Nor does this law, like those aimed at requiring parties to show a modicum of support in order to secure a place on the election ballot, prevent the formation of numerous small parties. Indeed, the activity banned by Minnesota's law is the formation of coalitions, not the division and dissension of "splintered parties and unrestrained factionalism," Id., at 736.
As for the State's argument that the fusion ban encourages candidate competition, this claim treats-candidates" as fungible goods, ignoring entirely each party's interest in nominating not just any candidate, but the candidate who best represents the party's views. Minnesota's fusion ban simply cannot be justified with reference to this or any of the above mentioned rationales. I turn, therefore, to what appears to be the true basis for the Court's holding--the interest in preserving the two party system.
Before addressing the merits of preserving the two party system as a justification for Minnesota's fusion ban, I should note that, in my view, it is impermissible for the Court to consider this rationale. Minnesota did not argue in its briefs that the preservation of the two party system supported the fusion ban, and indeed, when pressed at oral argument on the matter, the State expressly rejected this rationale. Tr. of Oral Arg. 26. Our opinions have been explicit in their willingness to consider only the particular interests put forward by a State to support laws that impose any sort of burden on First Amendment rights. See Anderson, 460 U.S., at 789 (the Court will "identify and evaluate the precise interests put forward by the State as justifications for the burden imposed by its rule"); id. at 817 (Rehnquist, J., dissenting) (state laws that burden First Amendment rights are upheld when they are " `tied to a particularized legitimate purpose,' ") (quoting Rosario v. Rockefeller, 410 U.S. 752, 762 (1973)); Burdick,, 504 U.S., at 434 .
Our jurisprudence in this area reflects a certain tension: on the one hand, we have been clear that political stability is an important state interest and that incidental burdens on the formation of minor parties are reasonable to protect that interest, see Storer, 415 U.S., at 736 ; on the other, we have struck down state elections laws specifically because they give "the two old, established parties a decided advantage over any new parties struggling for existence," Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23, 31 (1968). 7 Between these boundaries, we have acknowledged that there is "no litmus paper test for separating those restrictions that are valid fromthose that are invidious . . . The rule is not self executing and is no substitute for the hard judgments that must be made." Storer, 415 U.S., at 730 .
In some respects, the fusion candidacy is the best marriage of the virtues of the minor party challenge to entrenched viewpoints 10 and the political stability that the two party system provides. The fusion candidacy does not threaten to divide the legislature and create significant risks of factionalism, which is the principal risk proponents of the two party system point to. But it does provide a means by which voters with viewpoints not adequately represented by the platforms of the two major parties can indicate to a particular candidate that--in addition to his support for the major party views--he should be responsive to the views of the minor party whose support for him was demonstrated where political parties demonstrate support--on the ballot.
The strength of the two party system--and of each of its major components--is the product of the power of the ideas, the traditions, the candidates, and the voters thatconstitute the parties. 11 It demeans the strength of the two party system to assume that the major parties need to rely on laws that discriminate against independent voters and minor parties in order to preserve their positions of power. 12 Indeed, it is a central theme of our jurisprudence that the entire electorate, which necessarily includes the members of the major parties, will benefit from robust competition in ideas and governmental policies that " `is at the core of our electoral process and of the First Amendment freedoms.' " See Anderson, 460 U.S., at 802 .
In my opinion legislation that would otherwise be unconstitutional because it burdens First Amendment interests and discriminates against minor political parties cannot survive simply because it benefits the two major parties. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
I join parts I and II of Justice Stevens's dissent, agreeing as I do that none of the concerns advanced by the State suffices to justify the burden of the challenged statutes on petitioners' First Amendment interests. I also agree with Justice Stevens's view, set out in the first paragraph of Part III, that the State does not assert the interest in preserving "the traditional two party system" upon which the majority repeatedly relies in upholding Minnosota's statutes, see, e.g., ante, at 15 ("The Constitution permits the Minnesota Legislature to decide that political stability is best served through a healthy two party system"). Actually, Minnesota's statement of the "important regulatory concerns advanced by the State's ban on ballot fusion," Brief for Petitioners 40, contains no reference whatsoever to the "two party system," nor even any explicit reference to "political stability" generally. See id., at 40-50.
To be sure, the State does assert its intention to prevent "party splintering," id., at 46-50, which may not be separable in the abstract from a desire to preservepolitical stability. 1 But in fact the State has less comprehensive concerns; the primary dangers posed by what it calls "major party splintering and factionalism," id., at 47, are said to be those of "turn[ing] the general election ballot into a forum for venting intraparty squabbles," ibid., and reducing elections to "a thinly disguised ballot issue campaign," id., at 49. Nowhere does the State even intimate that the splintering it wishes to avert might cause or hasten the demise of the two party system. In these circumstances, neither the State's point about "splintering," nor its tentative reference to "political stability" at oral argument, n. 1, supra, may fairly be assimilated to the interest posited by the Court of preserving the "two party system." Accordingly, because I agree with Justice Stevens, ante, at 9, that our election cases restrict our consideration to "the precise interests put forward by the State as justifications for the burden imposed by its rule," Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780, 789 (1983), 2 I would judge the challenged statutes only on the interests the State has raised in their defense and would hold them unconstitutional.
I am, however, unwilling to go the further distance of considering and rejecting the majority's "preservation of the two party system" rationale. For while Minnesota has made no such argument before us, I cannot discount the possibility of a forceful one. There is considerable consensus that party loyalty among American voters hasdeclined significantly in the past four decades, see, e.g., W. Crotty, American Parties in Decline 26-34 (2d ed. 1984); Jensen, The Last Party System: Decay of Consensus, 1932-1980, in The Evolution of American Electoral Systems 219-225, (P. Kleppner et al. eds. 1981), and that the overall influence of the parties in the political process has decreased considerably, see, e.g., Cutler, Party Government Under the American Constitution, 134 U. Penn. L. Rev. 25 (1987); Sundquist, Party Decay and the Capacity to Govern, in The Future of American Political Parties: The Challenge of Governance 42-69 (J. Fleishman ed. 1982). In the wake of such studies, it may not be unreasonable to infer that the two party system is in some jeopardy. See, e.g., Lowi, N. Y. Times Aug. 23, 1992, Magazine, p. 28 ("[H]istorians will undoubtably focus on 1992 as the beginning of the end of America's two party system").
Surely the majority is right that States "have a strong interest in the stability of their political systems," ante, at 15, that is, in preserving a political system capable of governing effectively. If it could be shown that the disappearance of the two party system would undermine that interest, and that permitting fusion candidacies poses a substantial threat to the two party scheme, there might well be a sufficient predicate for recognizing the constitutionality of the state action presented by this case. Right now, however, no State has attempted even to make this argument, and I would therefore leave its consideration for another day.
[ Footnote 1 ] "Fusion," also called "cross filing" or "multiple party nomination," is "the electoral support of a single set of candidates by two or more parties." Argersinger, "A Place on the Ballot": Fusion Politics and Antifusion Laws, 85 Amer. Hist. Rev. 287, 288 (1980); see also Twin Cities Area New Party v. McKenna, 73 F. 3d 196, 197-198 (CA8 1996) (Fusion is "the nomination by more than one political party of the same candidate for the same office in the same general election").
[ Footnote 2 ] The DFL is the product of a 1944 merger between Minnesota's Farmer Labor Party and the Democratic Party, and is a "major party" under Minnesota law. Minn. Stat. §200.02, subd. 7(a) (1994) (major parties are parties that have won five percent of a statewide vote and therefore participate in the state primary elections).
[ Footnote 3 ] State law provides: "No individual who seeks nomination for any partisan or nonpartisan office at a primary shall be nominated for the same office by nominating petition, . . . " §204B.04, subd. 2. Minnesota law further requires that "[a]n affidavit of candidacy shall state the name of the office sought and shall state that the candidate: . . . (b) Has no other affidavit on file as a candidate for any office at the same primary or next ensuing general election." §204B.06, subd. 1(b).
[ Footnote 4 ] Because the New Party is a "minor party" under Minnesota law, it does not hold a primary election but must instead file a nominating petition with the signatures of 500 eligible voters, or 10 percent of the total number of voters in the preceding state or county general election, whichever is less. §§204B.03, 204B.07-204B.08.
[ Footnote 5 ] See Act of Apr. 13, 1901, ch. 312, 1902 Minn. Laws 524. The Minnesota Supreme Court struck down the ban in In re Day, 93 Minn. 178, 182, 102 N.W. 209, 211 (1904), because the title of the enacting bill did not reflect the bill's content. The ban was reenacted in 1905. 1905 Minn. Rev. Laws, ch. 6, §176, 27, 31. Minnesota enacted a revised election code, which includes the fusion related provisions involved in this case, in 1981. Act of Apr. 14, 1981, ch. 29, Art. 4, §6, 1981 Minn. Laws 73.
[ Footnote 6 ] Burnham Declaration, App. 15. ("Practice of [multiple party nomination] in the 20th century has, of course, been much more limited. This owes chiefly to the fact that most state legislatures . . . outlawed the practice"); McKenna, 73 F. 3d, at 198 ("[M]ultiple party nomination is prohibited today, either directly or indirectly, in about forty states and the District of Columbia . . . "); S. Cobble & S. Siskind, Fusion: Multiple Party Nomination in the United States 8 (1993) (summarizing States' fusion laws).
[ Footnote 7 ] See N. Y. Elec. Law §§6-120, 6-146(1) (McKinney 1978 and Supp. 1996). Since 1936, when fusion was last relegalized in New York, several minor parties, including the Liberal, Conservative, American Labor, and Right to Life Parties, have been active and influential in New York politics. See Burnham Declaration, App. 15-16; Cobble & Siskind, supra n. 6, at 3-4.
[ Footnote 8 ] See, e.g., Minn. Stat. §204B.06, subd 1(c) (1994) (candidates must be 21 years of age or more upon assuming office and must have maintained residence in the district from which they seek election for 30 days before the general election).
[ Footnote 9 ] Between the First and Second World Wars, for example, various radical, agrarian, and labor oriented parties thrived, without fusion, in the Midwest. See generally R. Vallely, Radicalism in the States (1989). One of these parties, Minnesota's Farmer Labor Party, displaced the Democratic Party as the Republicans' primary opponent in Minnesota during the 1930's. As one historian has noted: "The Minnesota Farmer Labor Party elected its candidates to the governorship on four occasions, to the U. S. Senate in five elections, and to the U. S. House in twenty five campaigns . . . . Never less than Minnesota's second strongest party, in 1936 Farmer Laborites dominated state politics. . . . The Farmer Labor Party was a success despite its independence of America's two dominant national parties and despite the sometimes bold anticapitalist rhetoric of its platforms." J. Haynes, Dubious Alliance 9 (1984). It appears that factionalism within the Farmer Labor Party, the popular successes of New Deal programs and ideology, and the gradual movement of political power from the States to the national government contributed to the Party's decline. See generally, Haynes, supra; Vallely, supra; M. Gieske, Minnesota Farmer Laborism: The Third Party Alternative (1979). Eventually, a much weakened Farmer Labor Party merged with the Democrats, forming what is now Minnesota's Democratic Farmer Labor Party, in 1944. Vallely, supra, at 156.
[ Footnote 10 ] The dissents state that we may not consider "what appears to be the true basis for [our] holding--the interest in preserving the two party system," post, at 9 (Stevens, J., dissenting), because Minnesota did not defend this interest in its briefs and "expressly rejected" it at oral argument, ibid; see also post, at 1-2 (Souter, J., dissenting). In fact, at oral argument, the State contended that it has an interest in the stability of its political system and that, even if certain election related regulations, such as those requiring single member districts, tend to work to the advantage of the traditional two party system, the "States do have a permissible choice . . . there, as long as they don't go so far as to close the door to minor part[ies]." Tr. of Oral Arg. 27; see also Brief for Petitioners 46-47 (discussing State's interest in avoiding "splintered parties and unrestrained factionalism") (citing Storer, 415 U.S., at 736 ). We agree.
[ Footnote 11 ] A similar provision applied to party candidates, and imposed a "flat disqualification upon any candidate seeking to run in a party primary if he has been `registered as affiliated with a political party other than that political party the nomination of which he seeks within 12 months immediately prior to the filing of the declaration.' " Another provision stated that "no person may file nomination papers for a party nomination and an independent nomination for the same office . . . . " Storer, 415 U.S., at 733 .
[ Footnote 12 ] The dissent insists that New York's experience with fusion politics undermines Minnesota's contention that its fusion ban promotes political stability. Post, at 7 n. 4, 13-14 n. 12 (Stevens, J., dissenting). California's experiment with cross filing, on the other hand, provides some justification for Minnesota's concerns. In 1946, for example, Earl Warren was the nominee of both major parties, and was therefore able to run unopposed in California's general election. It appears to be widely accepted that California's cross filing system stifled electoral competition and undermined the role of distinctive political parties. See B. Hyink, et al., Politics and Government in California 76 (12th ed. 1989) (California's cross filing law "undermined party responsibility and cohesiveness"); D. Mazmanian, Third Parties in Presidential Elections 134 (1974) (cross filing "diminish[ed] the role of political parties and work[ed] against the efforts of minority factions to gain recognition and a hearing in the electoral arena").
[ Footnote 13 ] The dissent rejects the argument that Minnesota's fusion ban serves its alleged paternalistic interest in "avoiding voter confusion." Post, at 1, 7 (Stevens, J., dissenting) ("[T]his concern is meritless and severely underestimates the intelligence of the typical voter"). Although this supposed interest was discussed below, 73 F. 3d, at 199-200, and in the parties' briefs before this Court, Brief for Petitioners 41-44; Brief for Respondent 34-39, it plays no part in our analysis today.
[ Footnote 1 ] The burden on the Party's right to nominate its first choice candidate, by limiting the Party's ability to convey through its nominee what the Party represents, risks impinging on another core element of any political party's associational rights--the right to "broaden the base of public participation in and support for its activities." Tashjian v. Republican Party of Conn., 479 U.S. 208, 214 (1986). The Court of Appeals relied substantially on this right in concluding that the fusion ban impermissibly burdened the New Party, but its focus was somewhat different. See Twin Cities Area New Party v. McKenna, 73 F. 3d 196, 199 (CA8 1996). A fusion ban burdens the right of a minor party to broaden its base of support because of the political reality that the dominance of the major parties frequently makes a vote for a minor party or independent candidate a "wasted" vote. When minor parties can nominate a candidate also nominated by a major party, they are able to present their members with an opportunity to cast a vote for a candidate who will actually be elected. Although this aspect of a party's effort to broaden support is distinct from the ability to nominate the candidate who best represents the party's views, it is important to note that the party's right to broaden the base of its support is burdened in both ways by the fusion ban.
[ Footnote 2 ] We have recognized that "[t]here is no evidence that an endorsement issued by an official party organization carries more weight than one issued by a newspaper or a labor union." Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 228 , n. 18 (1989). Given this reality, I cannot agree with the majority's implicit equation of the right to endorse with the right to nominate.
[ Footnote 3 ] In any event, the parade of horribles that the majority appears to believe might visit Minnesota should fusion candidacies be allowed is fantastical, given the evidence from New York's experience with fusion. See Brief for Conservative Party of New York et al. as Amici Curiae 20-25. Thus, the evidence that actually is available diminishes, rather than strengthens, Minnesota's claims. The majority asserts, ante, at 17, n. 12, that California's cross filing system, in place during the first half of this century, provides a compelling counter example. But cross filing, which "allowed candidates to file in the primary of any or all parties without specifyingparty affiliation," D. Mazmanian, Third Parties in Presidential Elections 132-133 (1974) (hereinafter Mazmanian), is simply not the same as fusion politics, and the problems suffered in California do not provide empirical support for Minnesota's position.
[ Footnote 4 ] See Brief for Petitioners 41-43; see also ante, at 13.
[ Footnote 5 ] A second "ballot manipulation" argument accepted by the majority is that minor parties will attempt to "capitalize on the popularity of another party's candidate, rather than on their own appeal to the voters, in order to secure access to the ballot." Ante, at 14. What the majority appears unwilling to accept is that Andy Dawkins was the New Party's chosen candidate. The Party was not trying to capitalize on his status as someone else's candidate, but to identify him as their own choice.
[ Footnote 6 ] Indeed, "[a] burden that falls unequally on new or small political parties or on independent candidates impinges, by its very nature, on associational choices protected by the First Amendment." Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780, 793 -794, (1983). I do not think it is irrelevant that when antifusion laws were passed by States all over the Nation in the latter part of the 1800's, these laws, characterized by the majority as "reforms" ante, at 4, were passed by "the parties in power in state legislatures . . . to squelch the threat posed by the opposition's combined voting force." McKenna, 73 F. 3d, at 198. See Argersinger, "A Place on the Ballot": Fusion Politics and Antifusion Laws, 85 Am. Hist. Rev. 287, 302-306 (1980). Although the State is not required now to justify its laws with exclusive reference to the original purpose behind their passage, Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463 U.S. 60, 70 -71 (1983), this history does provide some indication of the kind of burden the States themselves believed they were imposing on the smaller parties' effective association.
[ Footnote 7 ] In Anderson the State argued that its interest in political stability justified the early filing deadline for presidential candidates at issue in the case. We recognized that the "asserted interest in political stability amounts to a desire to protect existing political parties from competition," and rejected that interest. 460 U.S., at 801 -802.
[ Footnote 8 ] Even in a system that allows fusion, a candidate for election must assemble majority support, so the State's concern cannot logically be about risks to political stability in the particular election in which the fusion candidate is running.
[ Footnote 9 ] In fact, Minnesota's expressed concern that fusion candidacies would stifle political diversity because minor parties would not put additional names on the ballot seems directly contradictory to the majority's imposed interest in the stable two party system. The tension between the Court's rationale for its decision and the State's actually articulated interests is one of the reasons I do not believe the Court can legitimately consider interests not relied on by the State, especially in a context where the burden imposed and the interest justifying it must have some relationship.
[ Footnote 10 ] "[A]s an outlet for frustration, often as a creative force and a sort of conscience, as an ideological governor to keep major parties from speeding off into an abyss of mindlessness, and even just as a technique for strengthening a group's bargaining position for the future, the minor party would have to be invented if it did not come into existence regularly enough." A. Bickel, Reform and Continuity 80 (1971); see also S. Rosenstone, R. Behr, & E. Lazarus, Third Parties in America: Citizen Response to Major Party Failure 4-9 (1984).
[ Footnote 11 ] The Court of Appeals recognized that fusion politics could have an important role in preserving this value when it struck down the fusion ban. "[R]ather than jeopardizing the integrity of the election system, consensual multiple party nomination may invigorate it by fostering more competition, participation, and representation in American politics." McKenna, 73 F. 3d, at 199.
[ Footnote 12 ] The experience in New York with fusion politics provides considerable evidence that neither political stability nor the ultimate strength of the two major parties is truly risked by the existence of successful minor parties. More generally, "the presence of one or even two significant third parties has not led to a proliferation of parties, nor to the destruction of basic democratic institutions." Mazmanian 69; see also The Supreme Court, 1982 Term--Independent Candidates and Minority Parties, 97 Harv. L. Rev. 1, 162 (1983) ("American political stability does not depend on a two party oligopoly. . . . [H]istorical experience in this country demonstrate[s] that minor parties and independent candidacies are compatible with long term political stability. Moreover, there is no reason to believe that eliminating restrictions on political minorities would change the basic structure of the two party system in this country").
[ Footnote 1 ] Indeed, at oral argument, the State did hesitantly suggest that it "does have an interest, a generalized interest in preserving, in a sense, political stability . . . ." Tr. of Oral Arg. 26.
[ Footnote 2 ] See also Edenfield v. Fane, 507 U.S. 761, 768 (1993) (explaining that the mid level scrutiny that applies in commercial speech cases, which is similar to what we apply here, %[u]nlike rational basis review . . . does not permit us to supplant the precise interests put forward by the State with other suppositions").


text:
Nut allergies can be life threatening. Help protect your childâ€™s school environment and donâ€™t send nuts or foods containing nut ingredients to school. Use sandwich fillings such as lean meat, poultry, fish, egg salad, hummus or beans instead.
ï‚§ Rabies is a virus that attacks the central nervous system and eventually the brain. It is usually fatal for humans.
ï‚§ Rabies is spread in the saliva of an animal with rabies.
ï‚§ Rabies can affect any warm-blooded animal, domestic or wild. It has been found in dogs, cats, foxes, raccoons, skunks, wolves, bats, cattle and horses.
ï‚§ Rabid animals usually act very differently; for example - they may become aggressive, restless or excitable, appear to have difficulty swallowing or have weakness in their limbs, or lose their appetite or refuse to eat.
How can I prevent rabies?
What should you do if you have been bitten?
ï‚§ Your doctor will report the incident to Public Health. ï‚§ The Public Health Inspector will arrange to have the pet confined and observed for 10 days.
ï‚§ If possible, wild animals will be captured, euthanized and sent for rabies testing after a biting incident.


text: COCO BODU HITHI, MALDIVES – 35 minutes from Male international airport, this stunning Resort assures guests the opportunity to make every minute of their time in the stunning Maldives count. Receive 2 nights complimentary when staying a total of 7 nights, plus 2 children under 12 years stay for free on half board basis. Snorkelling, yoga, and movies under the stars is a little teaser of what this chic, luxe island resort has to offer.

industry_corpus2: Travel & Geography


text: Island Mist are for those fans of wine coolers and other day-to-day wines. Filled with crisp, fruity flavors, Winexpert's Island Mist series is a great, affordable go-to option for winemakers of all experience levels. These kits in particular, are a great starting place for beginner winemakers. These kits include 7.5 liters of juice along with easy to follow instructions, yeast, clarifiers, and stablizers to make 6 gallons of wine cooler. At a 7.5% ABV (which can be boosted) Island Mist kits are a great change of pace from typical table top wines.

industry_corpus2: Agriculture & Fisheries


text:
My name is Wojciech Mosiejczuk.
While working on an unannounced project at CreativeForge Games, I was tasked with Blueprint implementation of core gameplay mechanics and creation of NPC AI. By using features like interfaces, event dispatchers and behavior trees we were able to achieve desired performance and keep the system open to easy iteration during development. Screenshots below are illustrative and come from my personal project.
Blueprint best practices Comments, clear flow structure and reroute nodes are key to maintaining blueprint readability. Knowing that the main reason blueprints are eventually nativized into C++ code is not speed, but design complexity and workflow problems, I always try to make my blueprints simple and self-explanatory.
Thinking about performance According to Epic's Sjoerd De Jong, blueprints have no significant performance overhead if used correctly. This includes using custom functions and designing event-based functionality, avoiding casting or nested loops and careful blueprint cross-referencing.
Artificial Intelligence As part of the design team on the project, I was in charge of implementing NPC AI using Behavior Trees. Even with multiple blueprint-based tasks, services and decorators and almost 100 AI actors per level, there were no performance issues.
Phantom Doctrine is a strategic turn-based espionage thriller set at the peak of the Cold War. I performed a variety of game and level design tasks ranging from writing documentation to capturing promotional screenshots and trailer footage. On top of that, my film-related experience proved to be useful for preparing treatments, screenplays and shot lists for almost 25 minutes of cinematics and in-engine cutscenes.
Content design Many of my responsibilities were related to Phantom Doctrine's content, like creating and supervising character visualization presets or designing items for game's armors and weapon upgrades systems. This required a lot of historical research and management of asset request lists with hundreds of reference photos.
Marketing assets I had the pleasure to capture the gameplay footage that was used in the production of game's trailers. For each trailer I was given a specific list of features that needed to be showcased, some of them requiring me to manually modify save files, interface or camera, or even rearrange levels to get a particular shot.
Call center - Level gameplay Recording of an experienced player's gameplay on one of the levels I designed for Phantom Doctrine. The level features an old factory turned into a clandestine call center managed by a global conspiracy. I used my personal experience of urban exploration to enrich the game's level design vocabulary with skywalks and industrial skylights.
Outro cinematic The main purpose of this cinematic I was asked to write was to incite players to start a new, extended playthrough that offers an in-depth look at Phantom Doctrine's illicit Beholder Initiative. Story by Paweł Kroenke, 2D art by Tomasz Ćwik, animation by Artur Huk.
Achievements and trophies Being an avid console gamer and trophy hunter myself, I volunteered to design game's trophies. After getting approval on desired trophy difficulty and completion time, I created a list that aims to enhance a typical playthrough and encourage players to try more obscure features.
Force Feedback effects Given my experience as a console gamer, designing and implementing controller vibrations was a very informative task. I learned that the trick to good, experience-enhancing Force Feedback effects is to not overdo it: if the player realizes that the controller is vibrating, the effect was most probably too strong or was active for too long.
47-minute long documentary about a legendary Polish rock band produced for Warner Music Poland, written and directed by me. The film is built around contemporary interviews with band members and radio journalists interlaced with rare clips from the band's archive. Since the lead vocalist has been fighting with cancer, all income from the film's distribution was redirected to a cancer patient support charity.
Opening sequence Presented here are the first 100 seconds from the film, setting the mood for other 45 minutes. The biggest challenge of making this film was creating a coherent narrative out of hours of interviews and often random archival footage.
Official premiere The film's premiere took place in Atlantic cinema in Warsaw, during an official event in the presence of band members. Later that year, the film was broadcast twice on a nationwide TV channel.
While working at Rendeer I had the opportunity to direct and animate several music and lyric videos. I worked closely with my producer and artists to deliver appealing projects in circumstances that were always influenced by time and budget constraints.
Łąki łan - Pola Ar (music video) Inspired by band's New Age philosophy and deep, ambiguous lyrics, the video is a collage on the subject of an agricultural field being the source of all life. 7.5 Million views on Youtube.
Archeo - Burning Down The House (lyric video) Delivered in as little as four days after initial contact from the label, this project tested our ability to work under extreme time pressure.
Doremisie - Kraina Doremisiów (music video) Our first attempt at creating a music video for children. It was received so well it was invited to a children TV channel to air between shows.
Doremisie - Kołysanka Doremisiów (music video) A follow-up to "Kraina Doremisiów", reusing many assets and character rigs, which ended up being delivered in a third of the time it took us to make the previous video.
During almost 10 years that I worked at media postproduction companies I edited and/or animated over a 100 TV and cinema ads, mostly for music and film distributors. Some of them were based on international assets that only needed localization, but what was always required was attention to detail and technical knowledge necessary to follow cinema and TV specifications.
Queen of the Desert (film trailer) Werner Herzog's historical drama with Nicole Kidman. Since the trailer was edited based on an international version, our main focus here was animating the trailer's titles, preparing a subtitle track and creating a cinema-compliant DCP package.
The Greatest Showman Reimagined (cinema ad, 30") The rotating 3D box was animated using Video Copilot's Element 3D plugin for Adobe After Effects.
Don't forget to take a look at my CV and visit one of my profiles on twitter, linkedin or imdb.
You can also drop me an e-mail at wojciech@mosiejczuk.pl or give me a call: +48 663 425 457.

industry_corpus2: Gaming


text:
The HHP-2 accurately aligns and presses 1", 1-1/8", 1-1/4", and 1.5" headset cups. In addition, it presses cartridge bearings and cups into one-piece bottom bracket shells and holds fixed cup wrenches firmly in place when removing or installing adjustable-type bottom brackets. Features a quick-release design for fast tool installation and removal, extra long (30cm) handles for superior leverage, and stepped bushings for precise cup alignment.
Great tool - do your replacementsupgrades on your schedule!
My local shop doesn't charge much to press headsetBBs in, but this lets me do it on my time. And I used to workmanage bike shops, so I know what I'm doing.
Well built, easy to use quality tool.
A must have for guys who like to build their own bikes. A quality and easy to use tool that will last a lifetime. However, a bit pricey for a tool that isn't used a lot.
Five stars for performance and build quality generally, three stars for value. Averages out to four stars. If you are a pro mechanic pressing lots of bearings, then this seems like what you need.

industry_corpus2: Manufacturing


text:
Anchored by Bealls Outlet and Ace Hardware.
Adjacent to I-75. Visibility from signalized intersection. Pylon signage available. Close proximity to The Grove at Wesley Chapel. Excellent access: RI/RO on SR 54 and full access on Bruce B Downs Blvd.