Pub Date : 2023-06-20DOI: 10.1177/10659129231183915
Ali S. Masood, Jennifer Bowie
Given their place within the judicial hierarchy, judges on lower courts face a complex array of challenges including heavy caseloads, mandatory dockets, and the threat of Supreme Court reversal. Despite the extensive scholarship on the American courts, little is known about judicial interactions in comparative contexts. We articulate and evaluate a framework for lower court adherence to Supreme Court precedents by leveraging a cross-national design in three countries—Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States—with similar systems but meaningful institutional variability. We find that the mechanisms promulgating adherence to Supreme Court precedents do not substantially vary across design or institutional context. Instead, our results demonstrate that legal factors exert a consistent, homogeneous effect on lower court compliance across judicial systems. Our work offers new and important implications for studies on law and courts and comparative institutions, more broadly.
{"title":"Hierarchical Interactions and Compliance in Comparative Courts","authors":"Ali S. Masood, Jennifer Bowie","doi":"10.1177/10659129231183915","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231183915","url":null,"abstract":"Given their place within the judicial hierarchy, judges on lower courts face a complex array of challenges including heavy caseloads, mandatory dockets, and the threat of Supreme Court reversal. Despite the extensive scholarship on the American courts, little is known about judicial interactions in comparative contexts. We articulate and evaluate a framework for lower court adherence to Supreme Court precedents by leveraging a cross-national design in three countries—Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States—with similar systems but meaningful institutional variability. We find that the mechanisms promulgating adherence to Supreme Court precedents do not substantially vary across design or institutional context. Instead, our results demonstrate that legal factors exert a consistent, homogeneous effect on lower court compliance across judicial systems. Our work offers new and important implications for studies on law and courts and comparative institutions, more broadly.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135090838","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-06DOI: 10.1177/10659129231181594
S. Blanton, Dursun Peksen, Robert G. Blanton
What effect do peacekeeping operations (PKOs) have on women’s empowerment? The gendered consequences of peacekeeping have long been an issue of contention. Stung by multiple cases of peacekeepers directly engaging in sexual exploitation and abuse, the United Nations took measures to mainstream gender equality within PKO goals, ranging from protection from sexual violence to the encouragement of female participation in peacebuilding processes. Yet while a growing body of research has begun to provide insights into the gendered aspects of the PKOs themselves, much less is known about the broader gendered impact of PKOs on the host countries. To better understand these effects, we examine the extent to which PKOs serve to advance female empowerment in terms of women’s participation in official political channels as well as women’s civil liberties and active involvement in civil society participation. Examining these linkages from 1970–2013, we find that multidimensional PKOs are conducive to growing levels of women’s empowerment, though such growth decreases considerably after the conclusion of the PKO.
{"title":"The Impact of Peacekeeping Missions on Women’s Empowerment","authors":"S. Blanton, Dursun Peksen, Robert G. Blanton","doi":"10.1177/10659129231181594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231181594","url":null,"abstract":"What effect do peacekeeping operations (PKOs) have on women’s empowerment? The gendered consequences of peacekeeping have long been an issue of contention. Stung by multiple cases of peacekeepers directly engaging in sexual exploitation and abuse, the United Nations took measures to mainstream gender equality within PKO goals, ranging from protection from sexual violence to the encouragement of female participation in peacebuilding processes. Yet while a growing body of research has begun to provide insights into the gendered aspects of the PKOs themselves, much less is known about the broader gendered impact of PKOs on the host countries. To better understand these effects, we examine the extent to which PKOs serve to advance female empowerment in terms of women’s participation in official political channels as well as women’s civil liberties and active involvement in civil society participation. Examining these linkages from 1970–2013, we find that multidimensional PKOs are conducive to growing levels of women’s empowerment, though such growth decreases considerably after the conclusion of the PKO.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46777079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-04DOI: 10.1177/10659129231181079
Kimberly J. Cardenas, Heather Silber Mohamed, Melissa R. Michelson
Racial classifications are a social construct with no basis in biology; yet, race is an omnipresent and powerful factor in U.S. politics, shaping electoral boundaries, disbursement of resources, and political alliances (Omi and Winant 1994, Haney López 1994). Race, then, is a malleable construct wielded by varying interests, with racial definitions changing in response to social and political battles. Some new immigrant groups initially classified as not white have been reclassified as white over time, thereby benefitting from associated legal, economic, and sociopolitical privileges. More recently, however, some Latinos have sought recognition as a distinct non-white racial group, in acknowledgment of the racialization of their identities over time. We seek to better understand who is most likely to support a racialized Latino identity, and the political consequences of this choice. Using data from the 2020 Collaborative Multiracial Post-election Survey, we test whether individuals who believe that a Latino identity is a racial identity are also more likely to be interested in and engaged in politics. We also examine the extent to which support for a racialized Latino identity is associated with progressive attitudes on racial issues.
{"title":"The Political Consequences of Racialized Ethnic Identities","authors":"Kimberly J. Cardenas, Heather Silber Mohamed, Melissa R. Michelson","doi":"10.1177/10659129231181079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231181079","url":null,"abstract":"Racial classifications are a social construct with no basis in biology; yet, race is an omnipresent and powerful factor in U.S. politics, shaping electoral boundaries, disbursement of resources, and political alliances (Omi and Winant 1994, Haney López 1994). Race, then, is a malleable construct wielded by varying interests, with racial definitions changing in response to social and political battles. Some new immigrant groups initially classified as not white have been reclassified as white over time, thereby benefitting from associated legal, economic, and sociopolitical privileges. More recently, however, some Latinos have sought recognition as a distinct non-white racial group, in acknowledgment of the racialization of their identities over time. We seek to better understand who is most likely to support a racialized Latino identity, and the political consequences of this choice. Using data from the 2020 Collaborative Multiracial Post-election Survey, we test whether individuals who believe that a Latino identity is a racial identity are also more likely to be interested in and engaged in politics. We also examine the extent to which support for a racialized Latino identity is associated with progressive attitudes on racial issues.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49585631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-03DOI: 10.1177/10659129231180515
Raymond Foxworth, Carew Boulding
What shapes attitudes about Native American policy issues and inherent rights? Race and ethnicity are important in shaping US public opinion, but Native Americans have been almost entirely excluded from this research. We use data from an original survey and focus groups collected from the Reclaiming Native Truth project to examine the factors that shape attitudes toward Native American inherent rights and broader race conscious policy issues. We find high levels of support overall, but several factors influence lower levels of support. Many people have very low factual knowledge about Native American issues and rely heavily on partisan shortcuts in forming opinions, especially for policy issues. Overall, attitudes about inherent rights are less consistent as many people have very little knowledge about them. People of color tend to be more supportive than white people and white people tend to rely more on partisan shortcuts. Specifically, conservative whites are the least supportive across most issues. We also explore the effect of Native American resentment, finding there are people who hold overtly hostile views of Native Americans and are unsupportive of their rights and policies. Our findings contribute to growing literature on Indigenous resentment, settler colonialism and public attitudes toward Indigenous peoples.
{"title":"How Race, Resentment, and Ideology Shape Attitudes About Native American Inherent Rights and Policy Issues","authors":"Raymond Foxworth, Carew Boulding","doi":"10.1177/10659129231180515","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231180515","url":null,"abstract":"What shapes attitudes about Native American policy issues and inherent rights? Race and ethnicity are important in shaping US public opinion, but Native Americans have been almost entirely excluded from this research. We use data from an original survey and focus groups collected from the Reclaiming Native Truth project to examine the factors that shape attitudes toward Native American inherent rights and broader race conscious policy issues. We find high levels of support overall, but several factors influence lower levels of support. Many people have very low factual knowledge about Native American issues and rely heavily on partisan shortcuts in forming opinions, especially for policy issues. Overall, attitudes about inherent rights are less consistent as many people have very little knowledge about them. People of color tend to be more supportive than white people and white people tend to rely more on partisan shortcuts. Specifically, conservative whites are the least supportive across most issues. We also explore the effect of Native American resentment, finding there are people who hold overtly hostile views of Native Americans and are unsupportive of their rights and policies. Our findings contribute to growing literature on Indigenous resentment, settler colonialism and public attitudes toward Indigenous peoples.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41461228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-03DOI: 10.1177/10659129231181558
Z. Scott
The aftermath of the 2016 election cycle ignited significant interest in populism among scholars of American politics, yet relatively little engagement has gone toward how American political elites and institutions respond to populist insurgencies. This is problematic as the response a populist insurgency receives likely affects its degree of success, thereby conditioning the substantive importance of rising populism. This paper addresses this shortcoming by articulating an audition and assimilation theory of party response to populist insurgencies. This theory predicts that parties, presented with an electorally viable populist insurgency in a presidential primary contest, can choose to assimilate the message while removing the populist content to diffuse the insurgent nature. In contrast, an electorally unviable populist insurgency is treated as a failed audition, warranting no response. Using a corpus of presidential primary candidate speeches, I show that party nominees assimilate the topics used by populists who demonstrate electoral viability but do not become more populist themselves. This assimilation is also found among party platforms. Furthermore, assimilation is only performed by the Democratic party and exceeds assimilation of topics used by electorally viable, non-populist rivals.
{"title":"Inviting the Populists to the Party: Populist Appeals in Presidential Primaries","authors":"Z. Scott","doi":"10.1177/10659129231181558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231181558","url":null,"abstract":"The aftermath of the 2016 election cycle ignited significant interest in populism among scholars of American politics, yet relatively little engagement has gone toward how American political elites and institutions respond to populist insurgencies. This is problematic as the response a populist insurgency receives likely affects its degree of success, thereby conditioning the substantive importance of rising populism. This paper addresses this shortcoming by articulating an audition and assimilation theory of party response to populist insurgencies. This theory predicts that parties, presented with an electorally viable populist insurgency in a presidential primary contest, can choose to assimilate the message while removing the populist content to diffuse the insurgent nature. In contrast, an electorally unviable populist insurgency is treated as a failed audition, warranting no response. Using a corpus of presidential primary candidate speeches, I show that party nominees assimilate the topics used by populists who demonstrate electoral viability but do not become more populist themselves. This assimilation is also found among party platforms. Furthermore, assimilation is only performed by the Democratic party and exceeds assimilation of topics used by electorally viable, non-populist rivals.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46376400","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-03DOI: 10.1177/10659129231181591
K. Killen
In this article, I ask, “How do angry feminist claims get heard?” Angry feminist claims, I argue, inform, and mobilize by resonating with empathetic communities, legitimating feelings and experiences, and triggering energetic transfers among feminists and non-feminists. Through analysis of the 2018 protests of the nomination and confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court, I illustrate how angry feminist claims can be reclaimed as rational expressions of injustice, prompting divergent responses among differently situated audiences. Further, I demonstrate how anger as part of an affective appeal activates those attuned to hearing angry feminist claims as rational and legitimate, while simultaneously being challenged by intragroup intersectional differences.
{"title":"“Feel My Rage”: Angry Feminist Claims and Affective Mobilization","authors":"K. Killen","doi":"10.1177/10659129231181591","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231181591","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I ask, “How do angry feminist claims get heard?” Angry feminist claims, I argue, inform, and mobilize by resonating with empathetic communities, legitimating feelings and experiences, and triggering energetic transfers among feminists and non-feminists. Through analysis of the 2018 protests of the nomination and confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court, I illustrate how angry feminist claims can be reclaimed as rational expressions of injustice, prompting divergent responses among differently situated audiences. Further, I demonstrate how anger as part of an affective appeal activates those attuned to hearing angry feminist claims as rational and legitimate, while simultaneously being challenged by intragroup intersectional differences.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41315243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1177/10659129221113256
Costas Panagopoulos, Aaron C. Weinschenk
Recent research indicates that political developments and events can have important implications for health. In this study, we use data from a large, nationally representative survey (N = 1750) fielded in December 2020 to understand how the 2020 Presidential Election impacted self-reported health ratings. Several important findings emerge. First, many Americans report that their mental (14%) and general (6%) health has worsened compared to before the 2020 presidential election; similar number of Americans report improvements to their mental (15%) and general (8%) health. Second, those who voted for Trump and who disagree that Biden won the election are significantly less likely than their counterparts to report better mental, but not general, health compared to before the 2020 election. These relationships persist even in the context of a wide range of controls, including demographics, political predispositions, and perceptions of polarization.
{"title":"Health and Election Outcomes: Evidence from the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election","authors":"Costas Panagopoulos, Aaron C. Weinschenk","doi":"10.1177/10659129221113256","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129221113256","url":null,"abstract":"Recent research indicates that political developments and events can have important implications for health. In this study, we use data from a large, nationally representative survey (N = 1750) fielded in December 2020 to understand how the 2020 Presidential Election impacted self-reported health ratings. Several important findings emerge. First, many Americans report that their mental (14%) and general (6%) health has worsened compared to before the 2020 presidential election; similar number of Americans report improvements to their mental (15%) and general (8%) health. Second, those who voted for Trump and who disagree that Biden won the election are significantly less likely than their counterparts to report better mental, but not general, health compared to before the 2020 election. These relationships persist even in the context of a wide range of controls, including demographics, political predispositions, and perceptions of polarization.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49475989","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-27DOI: 10.1177/10659129231180190
Emily A. Davis
Recently, much debate has occurred regarding Machiavelli’s standards for good leadership. Drawing on his unusually approving—but still understudied—treatment of Marcus Furius Camillus, a Roman general and ruler, this paper presents a new perspective on Machiavelli’s leadership teachings. It argues that the Machiavellian leader possesses a rare self-honesty that frees him from heroic visions of himself and, thus, from dangerous vanity and from vengefulness toward opponents. Although this leader is no altruist, then, he often benefits his people more effectively than other rulers can, for he views the needs of his state with clearer eyes. This complex outlook differs from the ones that most scholars have attributed to the Machiavellian leader. It also provides us with a nuanced framework for considering what qualities to look for in potential leaders today.
{"title":"A New Perspective on Machiavellian Leadership","authors":"Emily A. Davis","doi":"10.1177/10659129231180190","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231180190","url":null,"abstract":"Recently, much debate has occurred regarding Machiavelli’s standards for good leadership. Drawing on his unusually approving—but still understudied—treatment of Marcus Furius Camillus, a Roman general and ruler, this paper presents a new perspective on Machiavelli’s leadership teachings. It argues that the Machiavellian leader possesses a rare self-honesty that frees him from heroic visions of himself and, thus, from dangerous vanity and from vengefulness toward opponents. Although this leader is no altruist, then, he often benefits his people more effectively than other rulers can, for he views the needs of his state with clearer eyes. This complex outlook differs from the ones that most scholars have attributed to the Machiavellian leader. It also provides us with a nuanced framework for considering what qualities to look for in potential leaders today.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49605343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-26DOI: 10.1177/10659129231175865
Chris Cassella, EJ Fagan, Sean M. Theriault
This paper examines how Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives vary in their earmarking behavior. After a 10-year moratorium, Congress enabling members to request small grants for community programs in their districts in the 2021 appropriations process. As part of a reform designed to limit corruption and wasteful spending, members had to submit written justifications for the grants, which provides insight into how members of Congress view their role as representatives. In performing a content analysis on 3007 earmark justifications, we find that Democrats are more likely to name the specific social groups comprising their party coalition in their justifications; Republicans rarely do so. Democrats are also more likely to request grants on their core partisan priorities, while Republicans tend to focus on large local infrastructure projects that are seemingly unrelated to their national priorities. Finally, we find some, but limited, evidence that earmark requests are a result of the different kinds of districts that members represent.
{"title":"Partisan Asymmetries in Earmark Representation","authors":"Chris Cassella, EJ Fagan, Sean M. Theriault","doi":"10.1177/10659129231175865","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231175865","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines how Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives vary in their earmarking behavior. After a 10-year moratorium, Congress enabling members to request small grants for community programs in their districts in the 2021 appropriations process. As part of a reform designed to limit corruption and wasteful spending, members had to submit written justifications for the grants, which provides insight into how members of Congress view their role as representatives. In performing a content analysis on 3007 earmark justifications, we find that Democrats are more likely to name the specific social groups comprising their party coalition in their justifications; Republicans rarely do so. Democrats are also more likely to request grants on their core partisan priorities, while Republicans tend to focus on large local infrastructure projects that are seemingly unrelated to their national priorities. Finally, we find some, but limited, evidence that earmark requests are a result of the different kinds of districts that members represent.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46919005","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-24DOI: 10.1177/10659129231177648
A. McKay, J. Lazarus
This article presents the first direct analysis of the influence of revolving-door lobbyists over the content of adopted public laws. We use earmarks to evaluate both the effects of lobbying and the possible additional effects of lobbying by individuals who formerly worked as congressional members and staff. Employing a fixed-effects panel approach, we evaluate original data describing the lobbying efforts of the more than 5000 accredited U.S. colleges and universities over a 12-year timeframe. Our analysis indicates that schools that lobby in a given year can expect to receive 54% more earmarks and 24% more earmarked funds relative to other schools and other years. Further, there is an additional significant effect of revolving-door lobbying that is greatest at lower levels of lobbying expenditures. Our results contribute to the emerging literature on comparative lobbying and speak to concerns about the possible corrupting influence of revolving-door lobbying over public policy.
{"title":"Policy Consequences of Revolving-Door Lobbying","authors":"A. McKay, J. Lazarus","doi":"10.1177/10659129231177648","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231177648","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents the first direct analysis of the influence of revolving-door lobbyists over the content of adopted public laws. We use earmarks to evaluate both the effects of lobbying and the possible additional effects of lobbying by individuals who formerly worked as congressional members and staff. Employing a fixed-effects panel approach, we evaluate original data describing the lobbying efforts of the more than 5000 accredited U.S. colleges and universities over a 12-year timeframe. Our analysis indicates that schools that lobby in a given year can expect to receive 54% more earmarks and 24% more earmarked funds relative to other schools and other years. Further, there is an additional significant effect of revolving-door lobbying that is greatest at lower levels of lobbying expenditures. Our results contribute to the emerging literature on comparative lobbying and speak to concerns about the possible corrupting influence of revolving-door lobbying over public policy.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45784081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：