24 research outputs found
"What’s Time Got to Do With It?: Ballot Measure, Strategic Timing, and Midterm Elections."
No full textThe past few decades have seen a wide variety of research into direct democracy ranging in topics that include, but are not limited to, the effect of ballot propositions on voting behavior, issue agenda-setting, and political knowledge. With all these advances, there is surprisingly little work on the effect timing has on proposition proposal and passage rates. Knowing that the uninformed electorate rarely participates in low-stimulus elections, and in accordance with the work on uninformed voters “no” vote as well as on vote cue taking, this research addresses the question: Is an initiative more likely to pass by direct vote in a midterm election, when there is low voter turnout, the demographic of uninformed “no” voters are removed, and biased voting cues from informed to uninformed voters are muted? Hypothesizing that initiatives are more likely to pass in midterm and off-year elections than during general elections, and that more initiatives will be proposed during low-stimulus elections, the study uses a panel data set of all initiatives from 1978 to 2014 in order to test the effect of time on proposal and passage rate. Preliminary results indicate that timing fails to have a significant effect, and that there is little difference in proposal rate. However the results suggest a large increase in the number of initiatives proposed during recent midterm elections. This finding alone demonstrates that initiative entrepreneurs may be strategically timing measures for low-turnout elections, removing the potential of uninformed citizens voting against the measure, hopefully increasing the chance of passage
“Where Have You Gone Federalism, the States Turn Their Lonely Eyes to You: An Empirical Investigation into the Rehnquist Court’s Federalism Decisions.”
No full textThe weakening of the levels of federalism due to New Deal policies and the 1937 Court-packing scandal, as well as re-solidification under the Rehnquist Court, has received much academic attention in the past few decades. Qualitative, (Belsky 2002; Overby 2003; Garry 2006) as well as quantitative, research (Maltzman and Wahlbeck 2005; Collins 2007; Parker 2011) has studied a wide variety of federalism topics in relation to the Rehnquist Court, but few have tried to uncover empirical support for the argument that a revival occurred during this era due to Chief Justice Rehnquist himself and his support of a limited central federal government. I suggest that an empirical test of the effect of Rehnquist's role as a chief justice on the federalism voting of Supreme Court justices will provide the explanation that the literature lacks. Not only will this test provide evidence that the conservative ideological nature of Supreme Court justices leads to ruling in favor of the states, but that the emphasis on re-establishing federalism by Chief Justice Rehnquist during this era lead to the increased number or pro-states rulings that transpired in comparison to earlier Courts. In the end, this work seeks to add to the literature by providing an empirical test of judicial decision-making during the Rehnquist era, offering a reason as to why the increased number of state sovereignty promoting federalism decisions occurred when they did
Waiting for federalism: An empirical investigation into the Rehnquist Court's federalism decisions
No full textThe weakening of the levels of federalism due to New Deal policies and the 1937 Court-packing scandal, as well as re-solidification under the Rehnquist Court, has received much academic attention in the past few decades. Qualitative, (Belsky 2002; Overby 2003; Garry 2006) as well as quantitative, research (Maltzman and Wahlbeck 2005; Collins 2007; Parker 2011) has studied a wide variety of federalism topics in relation to the Rehnquist Court, but few have tried to uncover empirical support for the argument that a revival occurred during this era due to Chief Justice Rehnquist himself and his support of a limited central federal government. I suggest that an empirical test of the effect of Rehnquist's role as a chief justice on the federalism voting of Supreme Court justices will provide the explanation that the literature lacks. Not only will this test provide evidence that the conservative ideological nature of Supreme Court justices leads to ruling in favor of the states, but that the emphasis on re-establishing federalism by Chief Justice Rehnquist during this era lead to the increased number or pro-states rulings that transpired in comparison to earlier Courts. In the end, this work seeks to add to the literature by providing an empirical test of judicial decision-making during the Rehnquist era, offering a reason as to why the increased number of state sovereignty promoting federalism decisions occurred when they did
“Federalism Lost: The Roberts Courts Failure to Continue Rehnquist’s Federalism Revolution.”
No full textChief Justice Rehnquist, the Rehnquist Court, and the era of devolution have spawned a great deal of scholarly attention on the Court’s role in federalism. The Rehnquist Court itself has been the decider in a number of cases that have strengthened the role of state government under the 10th Amendment, and has led some in the field to argue that this Court waged a revolution of sorts to reestablish the lines of federalism. To find out if this argument has merit, we ask if the conservative justices of the Rehnquist and Roberts’ Courts based their vote decisions on their ideological policy attitudes or on their belief in federalism. We examine both conservative Courts to accomplish our goal, which is two fold. First, we are generally examining whether the prescribed federalism revolution of the Rehnquist Court is still being waged today, leading to the argument that conservative ideology produces more rulings in favor of state sovereignty, and if not, secondly, make the argument that the federalism doctrine of the Rehnquist Court was distinctive to that Court and not all conservative leaning Courts. In the end, this work seeks to add to the expanding literature on judicial decision-making, generally, and the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts, specifically
What Does This Meme to You? A Test of a Critical Thinking Exercise for the American Government Classroom
No full textA Political Institution The Right Can Trust? Ballot Initiatives, Conservative Social Policy, and Protection Against Congressional Seat Change.
No full textWhat Does This Meme to You? A Test of a Critical Thinking Exercise for the American Government Classroom
No full textAn Undergraduate Course on the Road to Law School and a Legal Career for First-Generation Students and Other Underrepresented Groups in the Profession
No full textAn Undergraduate Course on the Road to Law School and a Legal Career for First-Generation Students and Other Underrepresented Groups in the Profession
No full textCan SPOC (Self-Paced Online Courses) Live Long and Prosper? A Comparison Study of a New Species of Online Course Delivery
No full textNumerous formats exist for online course delivery: pure online, blended or hybrid, flipped and web-enhanced. The literature is replete with comparison studies on the efficacy of online, hybrid and traditional format courses. However, the self-paced online course, a relatively new and rare variation, has received very little coverage in the body of research on this topic. This study examines the components of a self-paced online course specifically designed to incorporate web-based pedagogy to create an engaging and dynamic learning environment. It compares student performance in a self-paced online course, a conventional online course and a traditional in-class course and reveals the potential for students to thrive in a wide variety of online course formats. This study provides useful information to administrators exploring online programming options and online instructors seeking to improve student performance
