DOCSLIB.ORG

Copyright by Edward James Fagan 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Copyright by Edward James Fagan 2020 The Dissertation Committee for Edward James Fagan Certifies that this is the approved version of the following Dissertation Information Wars: Party Elites, Think Tanks and Polarization in Congress Committee: Bryan D. Jones, Supervisor Derek Epp Sean Theriault Christopher Wlezien Christina Wolbrecht Information Wars: Party Elites, Think Tanks and Polarization in Congress by Edward James Fagan, Ph.D. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May 2020 Acknowledgements Luck is a bigger factor in our lives than most of us like to admit. Six years ago, I had to choose between four great graduate programs knowing little about how graduate school and academia actually worked. All I knew was that I wanted to study political science and public policy. I ended up choosing to study under Bryan Jones at the University of Texas, but I almost decided to attend each of the other three programs. It was the best decision of my life. Bryan pushes his students to do exciting, original and pathbreaking research. His approach might backfire if it did not come paired with an enormous time commitment, patience and his fostering of one of the richest intellectual communities in the discipline. I will deeply miss our weekly meetings to discuss not just this dissertation, but also political science more broadly, current events and life. I promise to repay the favor as a mentor for the next generation. I was also lucky to have the best colleagues on my committee, at the University of Texas at Austin, and the broader world of the Comparative Agendas Project. Thank you Derek Epp, Sean Theriault, Chris Wlezien and Christina Wolbrecht for being the best committee anyone could ask for. I also owe a tremendous debt to other faculty. Thank you Alison Craig, Chris Faricy, Michael Findley, Wendy Hunter, Chris Koski, Eric McDaniel, Peter Mortensen, Daron Shaw, Bat Sparrow and Sam Workman. I also had the best peers in the business at the Policy Agendas Project. Thank you Christine Bird, Felipe Brasil, Ross Buchanon, Laura De Castro Quaglia, Maraam Dwidar, Connor Dye, Rebecca Eissler, Henry Flatt, Guy Freeman, Jon Lewallen, Katie Madel, Zac McGee, Annelise Russell, JoBeth Shafran, Brooke Shannon, Trey Thomas and Michelle Whyman. iv Long before graduate school, I had the good fortune of having amazing teachers, mentors and bosses in my life. I would never have succeeded in graduate school without the support of Raymond Baker, Joe Cammarano, Tom Cardamone, Clark Gascoigne, Jack Dirr, Jeff Hauser, Bob Johnson and Heather Lowe. Thank you for your advice, patience and encouragement. I was also privileged to take the long and windy road to where I am today. Thank you to my parents and family for providing me that privilege. I was able to quit a well- paying job that I loved at 28 years old. I could not have taken that leap without your unwavering support. I know that I was not the easiest child to raise, but you allowed me to pursue the career of my dreams despite a deeply uncertain outcome. Finally, thank you Elle. Graduate school often required that I sacrifice time, attention and focus that you deserved. These past five years have been the happiest of my life. v Abstract Information Wars: Party Elites, Think Tanks and Polarization in Congress Edward James Fagan The University of Texas at Austin, 2020 Supervisor: Bryan D. Jones For much of modern history, U.S. political parties adopted a consensus non-partisan knowledge regime, consisting of experts at universities, non-partisan think tanks and government agencies, to inform policymaking decisions. However, after the consensus supported by the knowledge regime enabled the expansion of the scope of federal government domestic policy during the 1950s-1970s period, ideological conservatives rejected the non-partisan regime and created their own alternative knowledge regime centered around a small number of party-aligned think tanks. Democrats followed a few decades later to create their own alternative knowledge regime. These think tanks fill a privileged role advising political parties that is reserved for formal party organizations in most democracies. I argue that they use a variety of strategies, including issue redefinition, activating latent preferences and elite persuasion, to move their party’s positions away from the center and toward the left or right. They published biased policy analysis that often makes claims which conflict with claims made by non-partisan policy analysis. As they become larger and more influential across time or between issues, party-aligned think tanks increase polarization in Congress. vi Table of Contents List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... x List of Figures .................................................................................................................... xii Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 Plan for the Book ........................................................................................................ 9 Chapter 2: Knowledge Regimes, Think Tanks and U.S. Political Parties ........................ 16 History of think tanks, political parties and knowledge regimes in the U.S. ........... 19 Technocratic era (1920s-1970s) .......................................................... 19 Conservative reaction (1970s-1990s) .................................................. 23 Progressive counter-reaction (2000s-present) ..................................... 34 U.S. think tanks as party-like organizations ........................................ 39 Research design ........................................................................................................ 42 Definitions ........................................................................................... 43 Case Selection ..................................................................................... 47 Summary .................................................................................................................. 52 Chapter 3: Theory of Information and Political Parties .................................................... 54 Theories of U.S. party position-taking ..................................................................... 56 Office-seeking and coalitional theories of political parties ................. 56 Extended political network theory and policy-seeking political parties ............................................................................................ 61 My theory of party positions. ................................................................................... 64 Information theory and Congress ........................................................ 64 My theory of information and preferences .......................................... 69 vii Party-aligned think tanks strategies ..................................................... 74 Summary .................................................................................................................. 77 Chapter 4: Comparative Policy Analysis .......................................................................... 79 Party-Aligned Think Tanks and Biased Policy Analysis ......................................... 80 Bias ...................................................................................................... 80 Framing ................................................................................................ 85 Research design ........................................................................................................ 86 Comparative policy analysis case studies ................................................................ 91 American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 ............................. 91 Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act of 2010 ........................... 95 Clean Energy Portfolio Standards ..................................................... 100 Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013 ......................................................... 105 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 .......................................................... 113 Summary ................................................................................................................ 118 Chapter 5: Polarization and Party-Aligned Think Tanks Over Time .............................. 122 Research on polarization ........................................................................................ 125 Elites at Party-Aligned Think Tanks and Polarization ...................... 131 Results .................................................................................................................... 134 Party-Aligned Think Tanks and Polarization in Congress ................ 134 Party-Aligned Think Tanks and Cuts to Congressional Capacity ..... 143 Summary ................................................................................................................ 149 Chapter 6: Measuring Polarization Across Issues ........................................................... 151 Measuring Polarization Across Issues .................................................................... 152 viii Summary ...............................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • MAP Act Coalition Letter Freedomworks

    MAP Act Coalition Letter Freedomworks

    April 13, 2021 Dear Members of Congress, We, the undersigned organizations representing millions of Americans nationwide highly concerned by our country’s unsustainable fiscal trajectory, write in support of the Maximizing America’s Prosperity (MAP) Act, to be introduced by Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) and Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.). As we stare down a mounting national debt of over $28 trillion, the MAP Act presents a long-term solution to our ever-worsening spending patterns by implementing a Swiss-style debt brake that would prevent large budget deficits and increased national debt. Since the introduction of the MAP Act in the 116th Congress, our national debt has increased by more than 25 percent, totaling six trillion dollars higher than the $22 trillion we faced less than two years ago in July of 2019. Similarly, nearly 25 percent of all U.S. debt accumulated since the inception of our country has come since the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Now more than ever, it is critical that legislators take a serious look at the fiscal situation we find ourselves in, with a budget deficit for Fiscal Year 2020 of $3.132 trillion and a projected share of the national debt held by the public of 102.3 percent of GDP. While markets continue to finance our debt in the current moment, the simple and unavoidable fact remains that our country is not immune from the basic economics of massive debt, that history tells us leads to inevitable crisis. Increased levels of debt even before a resulting crisis slows economic activity -- a phenomenon referred to as “debt drag” -- which especially as we seek recovery from COVID-19 lockdowns, our nation cannot afford.
  • The Culture of Wikipedia

    The Culture of Wikipedia

    Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia Good Faith Collaboration The Culture of Wikipedia Joseph Michael Reagle Jr. Foreword by Lawrence Lessig The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Web edition, Copyright © 2011 by Joseph Michael Reagle Jr. CC-NC-SA 3.0 Purchase at Amazon.com | Barnes and Noble | IndieBound | MIT Press Wikipedia's style of collaborative production has been lauded, lambasted, and satirized. Despite unease over its implications for the character (and quality) of knowledge, Wikipedia has brought us closer than ever to a realization of the centuries-old Author Bio & Research Blog pursuit of a universal encyclopedia. Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia is a rich ethnographic portrayal of Wikipedia's historical roots, collaborative culture, and much debated legacy. Foreword Preface to the Web Edition Praise for Good Faith Collaboration Preface Extended Table of Contents "Reagle offers a compelling case that Wikipedia's most fascinating and unprecedented aspect isn't the encyclopedia itself — rather, it's the collaborative culture that underpins it: brawling, self-reflexive, funny, serious, and full-tilt committed to the 1. Nazis and Norms project, even if it means setting aside personal differences. Reagle's position as a scholar and a member of the community 2. The Pursuit of the Universal makes him uniquely situated to describe this culture." —Cory Doctorow , Boing Boing Encyclopedia "Reagle provides ample data regarding the everyday practices and cultural norms of the community which collaborates to 3. Good Faith Collaboration produce Wikipedia. His rich research and nuanced appreciation of the complexities of cultural digital media research are 4. The Puzzle of Openness well presented.
  • A Financial System That Creates Economic Opportunities Asset Management and Insurance

    A Financial System That Creates Economic Opportunities Asset Management and Insurance

    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY A Financial System That Creates Economic Opportunities A Financial System That T OF EN TH M E T T R R A E A Financial System P A E S D U R E That Creates Economic Opportunities Y H T Asset Management and Insurance 1789 Asset Management and Insurance TREASURY OCTOBER 2017 2018-03031 (Rev. 1) • Department of the Treasury • Departmental Offices • www.treasury.gov 2018-03031 EO ASSET MGT COVER vSILVER.indd 1 11/2/17 12:27 PM T OF T OF EN TH EN TH M E M E T T T T R R R R A E A E P P A A E E S S D D U U R R E E Y Y H H T T 1789 1789 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY A Financial System That Creates Economic Opportunities Asset Management and Insurance Report to President Donald J. Trump Executive Order 13772 on Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System Steven T. Mnuchin Secretary Craig S. Phillips Counselor to the Secretary T OF EN TH M E T T R R A E P A E S D U R E Y H T 1789 Staff Acknowledgments Secretary Mnuchin and Counselor Phillips would like to thank Treasury staff members for their contributions to this report. The staff’s work on the report was led by Jared Sawyer and Dan Dorman, and included contributions from Joseph Dickson, Rebekah Goshorn, Sharon Haeger, Alex Hart, Gerry Hughes, W. Moses Kim, Daniel McCarty, Bimal Patel, Bill Pelton, Frank Ragusa, Jessica Renier, Bruce Saul, Steven Seitz, Brian Smith, James Sonne, Mark Uyeda, and Darren Vieira.
  • Reliability of Wikipedia 1 Reliability of Wikipedia

    Reliability of Wikipedia 1 Reliability of Wikipedia

    Reliability of Wikipedia 1 Reliability of Wikipedia The reliability of Wikipedia (primarily of the English language version), compared to other encyclopedias and more specialized sources, is assessed in many ways, including statistically, through comparative review, analysis of the historical patterns, and strengths and weaknesses inherent in the editing process unique to Wikipedia. [1] Because Wikipedia is open to anonymous and collaborative editing, assessments of its Vandalism of a Wikipedia article reliability usually include examinations of how quickly false or misleading information is removed. An early study conducted by IBM researchers in 2003—two years following Wikipedia's establishment—found that "vandalism is usually repaired extremely quickly — so quickly that most users will never see its effects"[2] and concluded that Wikipedia had "surprisingly effective self-healing capabilities".[3] A 2007 peer-reviewed study stated that "42% of damage is repaired almost immediately... Nonetheless, there are still hundreds of millions of damaged views."[4] Several studies have been done to assess the reliability of Wikipedia. A notable early study in the journal Nature suggested that in 2005, Wikipedia scientific articles came close to the level of accuracy in Encyclopædia Britannica and had a similar rate of "serious errors".[5] This study was disputed by Encyclopædia Britannica.[6] By 2010 reviewers in medical and scientific fields such as toxicology, cancer research and drug information reviewing Wikipedia against professional and peer-reviewed sources found that Wikipedia's depth and coverage were of a very high standard, often comparable in coverage to physician databases and considerably better than well known reputable national media outlets.
  • An Open Letter to the House: No Farm Bill in The

    An Open Letter to the House: No Farm Bill in The

    November 13, 2012 An Open Letter to the House: No Farm Bill in the Lame Duck! Dear Representative, Our organizations urge you to oppose consideration of a five-year Farm Bill in a lame duck session of Congress and to ensure that any extension of current law does not include renewal of direct payments. While our organizations have varying goals for farm and food policy, we are united in our conviction that this Congress cannot and should not address a Farm Bill that could cost taxpayers nearly $1 trillion over the next ten years in a lame duck session. A five-year bill will have sweeping fiscal, social, and environmental impacts and should be the result of careful and transparent deliberation. In our view, this Congress simply does not have the time to undertake such legislation this year. We urge you to honor your commitment to ensure that any farm and food legislation, including any extension, be subject to open rules so that legislators will have the opportunity to offer perfecting amendments. Sincerely, Andrew Moylan Ryan Alexander R Street Institute Taxpayers for Common Sense Phil Kerpen Grover Norquist American Commitment Americans for Tax Reform James Valvo Tim Lee Americans for Prosperity Center for Individual Freedom Chris Chocola Mattie Duppler Club for Growth Cost of Government Center Tom Schatz Matt Kibbe Council for Citizens Against FreedomWorks Government Waste Tim Chapman Duane Parde Heritage Action for America National Taxpayers Union David Williams Taxpayers Protection Alliance .
  • A New Conservative Approach to Immigration Enforcement

    A New Conservative Approach to Immigration Enforcement

    CONTENTS Introduction 1 Conservatism and “Zero Tolerance” Immigration Policy 1 Zero Tolerance and the History of Criminal Immigration Enforcement 2 Zero Tolerance and Due Process 4 The Public Safety Implications of Zero Tolerance 4 A Poor Return on Taxpayer Investment 5 Fear and the Formulation of Immigration Enforcement Policy 6 Conclusion 7 About the Authors 7 Departments of Justice and Homeland Security met on mul- tiple occasions to craft a plan, which they knew would sepa- R STREET POLICY STUDY NO. 212 rate migrant children from their parents, with the explicit November 2020 goal of deterring illegal border crossings. The resulting outrage eventually prompted President Trump to partially rescind the “zero tolerance” policy and fueled the political left’s opposition to the Trump administration’s handling of immigration laws.5 As a new administration takes A NEW CONSERVATIVE APPROACH office, immigration advocates have produced an exhaustive TO IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT list of border policies for the Biden White House to repeal, but this administration will have to prioritize which of the By Jonathan Haggerty and Arthur Rizer Trump-era immigration regulations to address first.6 And, while the political left undoubtedly presents a strong INTRODUCTION case against the “zero tolerance” prosecutions undertaken fter the Trump administration implemented its by its predecessor, a robust set of conservative arguments “zero tolerance” immigration policy in early 2018, against this policy offers the Biden administration ample, stories of children
  • Details of Module and Its Structure

    Details of Module and Its Structure

    Details of Module and its Structure Module Detail Subject Name Sociology Paper Name Development, Globalisation and Society Module Name/Title Religious Resurgence Pre-requisites Understanding implications of globalisation on religion Objectives The module aims to understand the impact of globalisation on religion; initially religion losing its significance and then resurging with new dimensions. Keywords globalisation, secularisation and religious resurgence Structure of Module / Syllabus of a module (Define Topic / Sub-topic of module) Globalisation and its Impacts – Religious Resurgence Role Name Affiliation Principal Investigator Prof Sujata Patel Department of Sociology, University of Hyderabad Paper Coordinator Prof Sherry Sabbarwal Department of Sociology, Panjab University, Chandigarh Content Writer/Author (CW) Veenat Department of Sociology, Post Graduate Government College for Girls, Sector-11, Chandigarh Content Reviewer (CR) Prof Sherry Sabbarwal Department of Sociology, Panjab University, Chandigarh Language Editor (LE) Prof Sherry Sabbarwal Department of Sociology, Panjab University, Chandigarh 1 Course: Development, Globalisation and Society Unit: Globalisation and its Impacts Module Title: Religious Resurgence Introduction In the present times, religious terrorism, love jihad, religious conversions and re-conversions (ghar wapsi), fundamentalists’ agendas, etc. are the buzzwords. Interestingly, this is happening in midst of the phase that is supposedly the most advanced stage of civilisation where human beings are acquainted with best of scientific innovations and information technology and the whole world has shrunk, to what McLuhan calls a ‘global village’. When the process of globalisation gained momentum in the twentieth century, affecting almost all facets of human life like economy, politics, intellect and culture, surpassing all constraints of time and space, it also had a significant impact on religion.
  • POLITICAL INTERACTION in WIKIPEDIA Jointly They Edit

    POLITICAL INTERACTION in WIKIPEDIA Jointly They Edit

    JOINTLY THEY EDIT: POLITICAL INTERACTION IN WIKIPEDIA 1 Jointly They Edit: Examining the Impact of Community Identification on Political Interaction in Wikipedia Jessica G. Neff1, David Laniado2, Karolin Eva Kappler2, Yana Volkovich2, Pablo Aragón2 & Andreas Kaltenbrunner2 University of Southern California1 Barcelona Media Foundation2 Abstract In their 2005 study, Adamic and Glance coined the memorable phrase ‘divided they blog’, referring to a trend of cyberbalkanization in the political blogosphere, with liberal and conservative blogs tending to link to other blogs with a similar political slant, and not to one another. As political discussion and activity increasingly moves online, the power of framing political discourses is shifting from mass media to social media. Continued examination of political interactions online is critical, and we extend this line of research by examining the activities of political users within the Wikipedia community. First, we examined how users in Wikipedia choose to display (or not to display) their political affiliation. Next, we more closely examined the patterns of cross-party interaction and community participation among those users proclaiming a political affiliation. In contrast to previous analyses of other social media, we did not find strong trends indicating a preference to interact with members of the same political party within the Wikipedia community. Our results indicate that users who proclaim their political affiliation within the community tend to proclaim their identity as a ‘Wikipedian’ even more loudly. It seems that the shared identity of ‘being Wikipedian’ may be strong enough to triumph over other potentially divisive facets of personal identity, such as political affiliation. JOINTLY THEY EDIT: POLITICAL INTERACTION IN WIKIPEDIA 2 Introduction Online media have become an increasingly important source of political information in recent years.
  • Et..J Pj--(\7,.,...Uv,1 Lit1oners Counse ,Ort Wit

    Et..J Pj--(\7,.,...Uv,1 Lit1oners Counse ,Ort Wit

    ,.,, \ ; . VIRGIN I A: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND CHRISTOPHER HORNER, et al, ) ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) Case No. CL15004712-00 ) RECTOR AND VISITORS OF ) GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY ) ) Respondent. ) ORDER RELEASING MATERIAL THIS DAY CAME counsel for the Petitioners and moved that this Court release the ma- terial the respondent has filed with the Court, to the Petitioners, as provided in this Court's orders entered April 22, 2016 and May 13, 2016. The Clerk of this Court will release the records to Pe- .. , I" h .. L. ,i.... • 1- lv0..' A k~ et..J pJ--(\7,.,...uv,1 lit1oners counse ,ort wit,,. 11 '>(-7""'-=7 • " U v. j '{_~ V\e,~ °'r~,-u-'"'{ w L~ -~ C.~!,......X a/-{:,...... r-<"<->fl""-~. r-~J:;;-:~ SO ORDERED this the ." ay of May, 2016. t,J·-1 "'.,_\ ..1.. f' .... ,..,.'"'-\-p;, d\v lt. i; IJ... • Richmond Circuit Judge . JEWETT, CLERK I ask for this: Seen and ______. Ma thew D. Hardin David Drummey, VSB# 87482 University Counsel 314 West Grace Street, Suite 304 4400 University Drive, MS 23A Richmond, VA 23220 Fairfax, VA 22030 Telephone: 804-608-64"56 Telephone: 703-993-2619 4 From: Edward W Maibach To: Sheldon Whitehouse; Barry KOnaer Cc: Kevin Irenberth; Cane Mark; J....S.b..uls!a; John P Holdren@osto eop gov; eatricia M Mel auohlin@ostp eop oov; eaul A P!rmever; eaul S Schoof; David M Strairs; Edward Sarachik; Mike Wallace; Roback Alan; Kalnav Eugenia; KJrtman Ben; Dr Bill I au; Professor IN Krishnamurti; Dr vasubandhu Misra; Dr Robert Dickinson; m.a.suw ..M.imel.a.; Goddard Lisa; Dr Alan Betts; loseoh Maikut; l ara Ollint Subject: Re: Letter to President, AG, and OSTP Director Date: Friday, October 02, 2015 7:11:27 PM From: Sheldon Whitehouse <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:39 PM To: Barry Klinger Cc: Edward W Maibach; Kevin Trenberth; Cane Mark; J Shukla; [email protected]; [email protected]; Paul A Dirmeyer; Paul S Schopf; David M.
  • UNIVERZITA KARLOVA Bakalářská Práce 2021 Kristýna Bartáková

    UNIVERZITA KARLOVA Bakalářská Práce 2021 Kristýna Bartáková

    UNIVERZITA KARLOVA FAKULTA SOCIÁLNÍCH VĚD Institut mezinárodních studií Katedra amerických studií Bakalářská práce 2021 Kristýna Bartáková UNIVERZITA KARLOVA FAKULTA SOCIÁLNÍCH VĚD Institut mezinárodních studií Katedra amerických studií Role Phyllis Schlafly na nepřijetí dodatku o rovných právech a její odkaz dnes Bakalářská práce Autor práce: Kristýna Bartáková Studijní program: Mezinárodní teritoriální studia Vedoucí práce: Lucie Kýrová, M.A., Ph.D. Rok obhajoby: 2021 Prohlášení 1. Prohlašuji, že jsem předkládanou práci zpracovala samostatně a použila jen uvedené prameny a literaturu. 2. Prohlašuji, že práce nebyla využita k získání jiného titulu. 3. Souhlasím s tím, aby práce byla zpřístupněna pro studijní a výzkumné účely. V Praze dne 2. května 2021 Kristýna Bartáková Bibliografický záznam Bartáková, Kristýna. Role Phyllis Schlafly na nepřijetí dodatku o rovných právech a její odkaz dnes. Praha, 2021. 81 s. Bakalářská práce (Bc). Univerzita Karlova, Fakulta sociálních věd, Institut mezinárodních studií. Katedra amerických studií. Vedoucí bakalářské práce Lucie Kýrová, M.A., Ph.D. Rozsah práce: 148 391 znaků Anotace Práce s názvem „Role Phyllis Schlafly v nepřijetí dodatku o rovných právech a její odkaz dnes“ pojednává o antifeministické konzervativní vedoucí hnutí STOP ERA Phyllis Schlafly, jež se stala vedoucí opozice vůči dodatku o rovných právech a jež mezi lety 1972-1982 cílenou kampaní především na křesťanské ženy v domácnosti odvrátila schválení tohoto dodatku. Práce je rozdělena do čtyř kapitol pojednávajících o historii opozice vůči dodatku, o politickém angažmá Phyllis Schlafly, o formování opozice ERA v 70. letech 20. století a o odkazu Phyllis Schlafly. Na příkladu zmobilizování křesťanské pravice na Floridě v 70. letech 20. století práce dokládá důležitost této náboženské koalice v ovlivňování voleb floridských zákonodárců v 70.
  • James I. Wallner

    James I. Wallner

    JAMES I. WALLNER Home Address: Office Address: 101 W. Augusta Pl. 1212 New York Ave. NW Greenville, South Carolina 29605 Suite 900 202-536-7663 Washington, D.C. 20005 [email protected] [email protected] ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS Professorial Lecturer, Department of Government, American University, 2018-Present. Adjunct Professor, Department of Politics, Catholic University of America, 2012-2020. Lecturer, Department of Politics, Catholic University of America, 2010-2012. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Governance Project Senior Fellow, R Street Institute, 2017-Present. Editor-in-Chief, Legislative Procedure, 2018-Present. Host, Politics In Question, 2019-Present. Group Vice President for Research, Heritage Foundation, 2016-2017. Executive Director, Senate Steering Committee, 2012-2016. Legislative Director, Senator Pat Toomey, 2011-2012. Legislative Director, Senator Jeff Sessions, 2008-2011. Legislative Assistant, Senator Jeff Sessions, 2007-2008. Legislative Assistant, Congressman Terry Everett, 2005-2007. FELLOWSHIPS & OTHER EXPERIENCE FELLOWSHIPS: Member, Task Force on the Judicial Nomination and Confirmation Process, The Constitution Project and the Project on Government Oversight, 2019-present. 1 Kluge Fellow, John W. Kluge Center, Library of Congress, 2019-2020 (conducted research for forthcoming manuscript, American Socrates: James Madison and the Virtue of Political Conflict). Fellow, Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, American University, 2018-Present. Senior Visiting Fellow, Center for the Study of Statesmanship, Catholic University of America, 2019-2020. Julia Araiza and James Rosenthal Fellow, Claremont Institute, 2017. OTHER EXPERIENCE: Contributor, Law and Liberty, 2017-Present. Contributor, Washington Examiner, 2017-Present. Contributor, Daily Caller, 2020-Present. EDUCATION Ph.D. Politics, Catholic University of America, awarded with Distinction, 2012. M.A. Politics, Catholic University of America, awarded with Distinction, 2009.
  • Politics and Practices of LGBTQ Christian Activism in Evangelicalism

    Politics and Practices of LGBTQ Christian Activism in Evangelicalism

    Community of Counter-Conduct: Politics and Practices of LGBTQ Christian Activism in Evangelicalism By © 2018 Jonathan Burrow-Branine Submitted to the graduate degree program in American Studies and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Chair: Ben Chappell Sherrie Tucker Henry Bial Lynn Davidman Dave Tell Date Defended: January 25, 2018 The dissertation committee for Jonathan Burrow-Branine certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Community of Counter-Conduct: Politics and Practices of LGBTQ Christian Activism in Evangelicalism Chair: Ben Chappell Date Approved: February 23, 2018 ii Abstract Scholars working at the intersections of American religious studies and gender and sexuality studies have broadened our understanding of the overlapping histories of faith communities and LGBTQ social movements in the US. Despite recent contributions to the history of LGBTQ activism in American religious traditions, this scholarship tends to overlook LGBTQ Christian identity work and activism in conservative Christian communities. Based on participant observation fieldwork with a faith-based nonprofit called The Reformation Project (TRP), this dissertation is an ethnography of how some LGBTQ Christians negotiate identity and difference and seek to create change within evangelicalism. TRP is a national parachurch organization with Kansas roots working to change, through grassroots organizing and theological training, mainly conservative evangelical attitudes and teaching about LGBTQ people. The material for the project is drawn from fieldwork with TRP at church services, conferences, organizing meetings, and other places over a twelve-month period beginning in late 2014. While mostly about the strategies and conversations specific to TRP’s efforts to foster change, I also use TRP as a window into broader conversations underway in evangelicalism about what it means to be LGBTQ and Christian.