articles+ search results

ARMS transfers -- United States and INTERNATIONAL relations

Longstanding tensions between Congress and the executive over U.S. support to the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen have spurred conflict between the branches over arms sales. In May 2019, U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo declared an emergency under the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) to bypass congressional "freezes" on arms sales and complete $8.1 billion in sales to members of the Saudi-led coalition. In response, Congress requested that the State Department inspector general (IG) investigate the matter. In a report released in August 2020, the IG determined that the emergency declaration comported with the AECA's procedural requirements but that the State Department's risk assessments and civilian casualty mitigation measures did not fully address legal concerns about the sales. The Trump administration has continued to move forward with arms sales, including by unilaterally reinterpreting a nonbinding multilateral export control regime to eliminate prohibitions on the export of certain unmanned aerial systems (UAS). A bipartisan group of legislators has introduced a bill to prevent such sales to all countries except select U.S. allies. In September, a UN report criticized U.S. and other countries' arms sales to the Saudi-led coalition and recommended referral of the situation in Yemen to the International Criminal Court (ICC). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

RACIAL minorities, LEGAL status of voters, and UNITED States Congressional elections

The author comments on the single-member district mandate for U.S. House of Representatives elections that was enacted by the Congress in 1967. Topics covered include the Congress' intentions for enacting the law including the representation of racial minority communities in the House, the law's unintended consequences on the political process, and the implications for the First Amendment political association rights of voters.

POLITICAL parties and LEGISLATORS

This article examines the creation of political parties in Congress with a focus on ties between emerging party leaders and members, 1789–1802. Using an egocentric selection model, we examine who John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison tied with as a function of the characteristics of the emerging leader, a member of Congress, and dyadic relationships between the two. We also examine whether ties affected the party chosen by members of Congress. Everything else equal, we find leaders were more likely to form ties with ideologically similar members, but find no evidence of them tieing with more pivotal voters. In response, members were more likely to join the Federalist party if they received a Federalist tie, but they were not more likely to join the Republican party if they received a Republican tie. Understanding such relationships is an important step for understanding the creation of parties in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ELECTION of legislators, ELECTION districts, POLITICAL candidates -- Attitudes, PERSONALITY, VOTERS -- Attitudes, and UNITED States. Congress. House

This article addresses the question of appearance-based effects by looking at the U.S. House of Representatives election 2016. We broaden the focus beyond existing studies by offering a comprehensive and systematic analysis of the three traits attractiveness, competence, and likability while simultaneously taking into account confounding third variables and possible interactions. Corresponding to the comparative character of electoral competition in the districts, we developed a relative measure of the three traits which we apply in an online survey. This measure also takes into account the raters' latency times, that is, their clicking speed, as a weighting factor for their ambiguity in the ratings. With these data we test whether appearance matters for the electoral outcome. We find that attractiveness positively affects the vote share, whereas perceived likability and competence play no role. The study also tests to what extent the found appearance effects are conditioned by incumbency status, age, and gender of the contestants. Furthermore, it gives hints which aspects of their appearance candidates could change to perform better at the ballot box. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

SOCIAL scientists, POLITICAL scientists, CIVIL service positions, CONGRESSIONAL hearings (U.S.), and RESEARCH institutes

Congressional hearings are a venue in which social scientists present their views and analyses before lawmakers in the United States, however quantitative data on their representation has been lacking. We present new, publicly available, data on the rates at which anthropologists, economists, political scientists, psychologists, and sociologists appeared before United States congressional hearings from 1946 through 2016. We show that social scientists were present at some 10,347 hearings and testified 15,506 times. Economists testify before the US Congress far more often than other social scientists, and constitute a larger proportion of the social scientists testifying in industry and government positions. We find that social scientists' testimony is increasingly on behalf of think tanks; political scientists, in particular, have gained much more representation through think tanks. Sociology, and psychology's representation before Congress has declined considerably beginning in the 1980s. Anthropologists were the least represented. These findings show that academics are representing a more diverse set of organizations, but economists continue to be far more represented than other disciplines before the US Congress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ENVIRONMENTAL policy, UNITED States elections, VOTING, LEGISLATORS, and UNITED States

Do elections affect legislators' voting patterns? We investigate this question in the context of environmental policy in the U.S. Congress. We theorize that since the general public is generally in favor of legislation protecting the environment, legislators have an incentive to favor the public over industry and vote for pro‐environment legislation at election time. The argument is supported by analyses of data on environmental roll call votes for the U.S. Congress from 1970 to 2013 where we estimate the likelihood of casting a pro‐environment vote as a function of the time to an election. While Democrats are generally more likely to cast a pro‐environment vote before an election, this effect is much stronger for Republicans when the legislator won the previous election by a thinner margin. The election effect is maximized for candidates receiving substantial campaign contributions from the (anti‐environment) oil and gas industry. Analysis of Twitter data confirms that Congressmembers make pro‐environmental statements and highlight their roll call voting behavior during the election season. These results show that legislators do strategically adjust their voting behavior to favor the public immediate prior to an election. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

MILITARY intelligence, RESEARCH & development, HISTORY, WAR reparations, and UNITED States. Air Force

This article explains how exploitation of research and development (R&D) configured into the post–World War II policies of the U.S. Army Air Forces (AAF) and U.S. Air Force (USAF). The narrative follows the coordination of operations LUSTY, OVERCAST, and PAPERCLIP and the Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) in the AAF’s exploitation of intelligence and reparations for postwar policies and politics. The history of the SAG’s efforts from 1944 to 1947 reveals the intensity with which the AAF and its consultants in the aeronautical sciences pursued Nazi R&D. The article helps explain the place of intelligence and reparations in AAF and USAF policies for postwar R&D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTERNATIONAL relations, GENDER inequality, PUBLIC officers, PUBLIC administration, PRESIDENTIAL elections, and POLITICAL science

How much gender diversity is there among experts in the United States? This study focuses on witnesses who testified before four US Senate committees: Agriculture; Commerce, Science & Transportation; Foreign Relations; and Health, Education, Labor & Pensions. Across the 9072 witnesses (2003–15), women comprised 23.7% of witnesses. In terms of panels, 49.8% were male-only, 5.8% were female-only, and 44.4% were mixed gender. Although the overall numbers remain significantly low proportionate to the female share of the US population, there was an incremental increase in the proportion of women testifying and of mixed gender panels. Non-governmental organizations had the highest share of female witnesses. The percentage of female witnesses does vary with which party controls the Senate, with the average female share higher under Democratic control. These findings raise questions for further study about what factors influence the selection of witnesses for US Senate hearings and whether a similar lack of diversity exists in other identity categories such as race and ethnicity. The effort could also be extended to other committees in the Senate, as well as to the US House. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

VOTING, INTERNATIONAL relations, PUBLIC officers, PUBLIC administration, PRESIDENTIAL elections, POLITICAL science, and UNITED States. Congress

By tracing the changing electoral incentives and political circumstances of partisans in Congress over time, this paper unpacks how and why substantive policy content has lost its relevance for influencing Congressional voting on gun control. It argues that as gun control positions have crystallized to become part of partisan identity, policy specifics have come to matter less for partisans in Congress than the general pro gun control or pro gun rights position that a piece of legislation symbolizes. Today, regardless of the specific policy contents of a bill, a gun vote serves as a signaling device from members of Congress to their partisan supporters that they are either passionate defenders of the Second Amendment (Republicans) or fierce protectors of America's children from gun violence (Democrats). That policy content has lost its relevance for Congressional voting on gun control is evident through the marked decline in vote splitting, the extinction of gun control moderates, and the all or nothing voting behavior of partisan shifters – those formerly pro-control Republicans, anti-control Democrats, and gun control moderates who shifted positions over time to vote the party line. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COMPUTER simulation, COMPUTER engineering, COMPUTER algorithms, and SET design

Recent research has leveraged computer simulations to identify the effect of gerrymandering on partisan bias in U.S. legislatures. As a result of this method, researchers are able to distinguish between the intentional partisan bias caused by gerrymandering and the natural partisan bias that stems from the geographic sorting of partisan voters. However, this research has yet to explore the effect of gerrymandering on other biases like reduced electoral competition and incumbency protection. Using a computer algorithm to design a set of districts without political intent, I measure the extent to which the current districts have been gerrymandered to produce safer seats in Congress. I find that gerrymandering only has a minor effect on the average district, but does produce a number of safe seats for both Democrats and Republicans. Moreover, these safe seats tend to be located in states where a single party controls the districting process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

POLITICAL parties, BOUNDED rationality, GOVERNMENT policy, PARTIES, and FORECASTING

Since the 1960s, Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Congress have taken increas- ingly polarized positions, while the public's policy positions have remained centrist and moderate. We explain this apparent contradiction by developing a dynamical model that predicts ideological positions of political parties. Our approach tackles the challenge of incorporating bounded rationality into mathematical models and integrates the empirical finding of satisficing decision making|voters settle for candidates who are \good enough" when deciding for whom to vote. We test the model using data from the U.S. Congress over the past 150 years and find that our predictions are consistent with the two major political parties' historical trajectories. In particular, the model explains how polariza- tion between the Democrats and Republicans since the 1960s could be a consequence of increasing ideological homogeneity within the parties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AMERICAN women in politics, POLITICAL parties, SOCIAL movements, and PARTISANSHIP

Women's elective office-holding stands at an all-time high in the United States. Yet women are far from parity. This underrepresentation is surprising given that more women than men vote. Gender–as a feature of both society and politics–has always worked alongside race to determine which groups possess the formal and informal resources and opportunities critical for winning elective office. But how gender connects to office-holding is not fixed; instead, women's access to office has been shaped by changes in law, policy, and social roles, as well as the activities and strategies of social movement actors, political parties, and organizations. In the contemporary period, data from the Center for American Women and Politics reveal that while women are a growing share of Democratic officeholders, they are a declining share of Republican officeholders. Thus, in an era of heightened partisan polarization, women's situation as candidates increasingly depends on party. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PATENT law, MAYO Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories (Supreme Court case), and PATENTABILITY -- Lawsuits & claims

In this article, the author argues that the U.S. Congress should abolish the Supreme Court promulgated, non-statutory exceptions to 35 U.S.C. section 101 of the Patent Act. It mentions about the U.S. Supreme Court case Mayo Collaborative Sers. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc. in which the court held that claims directed to a method of giving a drug to a patient, measuring metabolites of that drug, deciding whether to increase or decrease the dosage of the drug, were not patent-eligible subject matter.

CODIFICATION of law and STATUTORY interpretation

Where does lawgo afterCongress enacts it, but before courts interpret it and the public reads it? This seemingly simple question is in fact very complicated, without a single, predictable answer. This Article provides the first in-depth scholarly examination of the process by which enacted laws are organized and presented for public consumption, known as codification, a process that has mostly escaped the notice of judges and scholars of legislation, and is not explained in textbooks meant to introduce lawyers to the creation and interpretation of law. It argues that the failure to account for this process has left gaps in our understanding of what law is and how it should be interpreted. Law often undergoes significant change between enactment and the time it is organized within the U.S. Code, which is a compilation of Congress's individual enactments. The decision of how to organize these individual enactments within the Code, or whether to leave them out of the Code altogether, is made by a nonpartisan group of lawyers within Congress known as the Office of the Law Revision Counsel. These technical organizers have significant power over how (and in some cases, whether) courts, litigants, and the public see an enacted law, although their power differs depending on the type of Code title. This Article's descriptive and normative claims have realworld application because organization and context are central to interpretation, but interpreters have failed to grapple with how codification affects organization and context. This Article argues that interpreters must understand the full complexity of how law is organized and presented before they can make confident pronouncements about congressional bargains and legislative intent. Understanding the codification process provides a more accurate, albeit more complicated, path forward for statutory interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

POOR people, REPRESENTATIVE government, EQUALITY, and PARTISANSHIP

Scholars have identified partisan differences in policy representation—with Republicans more often found to represent the rich, while Democrats align with the preferences of less affluent voters. This paper explores these partisan differences, questioning this simple conclusion on both theoretical and methodological grounds. Instead, we develop and test a theory in which elected officials of both parties represent their co-partisans, who agree with one another on many policy issues. Yet, on a subset of issues, upper class and lower class co-partisans have diverging policy preferences: rich and poor Democrats disagree on social issues while rich and poor Republicans disagree on economic issues. We analyze roll call voting in the U.S. Senate and find that, in these cases, senators of both parties better represent the preferences held by affluent members of their party. Our findings underscore the value in examining the content of policy debates and theorizing about different forms of representation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]