Guide to the Charles E. Merriam Papers 1893-1957
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
David J Siemers
David J. Siemers Office Home Department of Political Science 1406 Lake Breeze Rd. University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh Oshkosh, WI 54904 800 Algoma Blvd. (920) 426-4289 (920) 424-0435 fax: (920) 424-0739 email: [email protected] Teaching Experience University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, Assistant Professor, 2001-05; Associate Professor, 2005- 10, Professor, 2010-present; Chair, 2011-15 US Presidency, American Political Thought, Modern Political Thought, Honors Seminar-Education, Ancient Political Thought, Political Film, American Government and Politics, Congress and the Legislative Process, Honors American Government and Politics, Honors Seminar-Ethics, Honors Introductory Seminar-Education, Lincoln’s Politics, Politics, Power and Protest in Great Britain (study abroad), Political Analysis (capstone), Power, Justice, and the State (FYE offering) Colorado College Colorado Springs, Colorado, Visiting Asst. Professor, 1999-2001 American Political Thought, The Western Political Tradition, Politics and Film, the Presidency, American Politics Wellesley College Wellesley, Massachusetts, Visiting Asst. Professor, 1998-1999 American Pol. Thought, Intro. to American Gov’t, Congress and the Leg. Process Bradley University Peoria, Illinois, Visiting Asst. Professor, 1997-1998 Intro. to American Government, Intro. to Theory, American Political Thought University of Wisconsin-Madison Teaching Assistant, 1992-96--Depts. of Pol. Science and Integrated Liberal Studies American Politics, Ancient Political Thought, Modern Political Thought Education University of Wisconsin (Madison, Wisconsin) Ph.D. Political Science, August, 1997 M.A. Political Science, December, 1992 St. Olaf College (Northfield, Minnesota) B.A. Political Science, 1991, Magna cum Laude Publications Book: Presidents and Political Thought, University of Missouri Press, 2009. “What did the president know and when did he know it” takes on a whole new meaning in Presidents and Political Thought. -
LEGISLATING “MILITARY ENTITLEMENTS”: a CHALLENGE to the CONGRESSIONAL ABDICATION THESIS By
LEGISLATING “MILITARY ENTITLEMENTS”: A CHALLENGE TO THE CONGRESSIONAL ABDICATION THESIS by Alexis Lasselle Ross A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of George Mason University in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Public Policy Committee: James P. Pfiffner, Chair ____________________________________ David J. Armor ____________________________________ Siona R. Listokin-Smith Janine Davidson, External Reader ____________________________________ Kenneth J. Button, Program Director ____________________________________ Mark J. Rozell, Dean Date: _______________________________ Fall Semester 2015 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Legislating “Military Entitlements”: A Challenge to the Congressional Abdication Thesis A Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at George Mason University by Alexis Lasselle Ross Master of Arts Naval War College, 2005 Bachelor of Arts Bucknell University, 2001 Director: James P. Pfiffner, Professor School of Public Policy Fall Semester 2015 George Mason University Fairfax, VA This work is licensed under a creative commons attribution-noderivs 3.0 unported license. ii DEDICATION This is dedicated to Georgette. This dissertation is not nearly the achievement that she is. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Jim Pfiffner for his exceptional leadership, patience, and support. He is a first-class advisor whose professionalism and work ethic inspire me. Siona Listokin and David Armor have been instrumental in accomplishing this project. They provided excellent guidance, particularly early on while I was learning my fields and developing my research topic. Special thanks to Janine Davidson for agreeing when asked late in the process to serve as the external reader. Her insights and enthusiasm for my research have always given me encouragement. -
News and Notes Peksonal and Miscellaneous
NEWS AND NOTES https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms PEKSONAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EDITED BY PITMAN B. POTTER University of Wisconsin Professor Frederic A. Ogg has been on leave of absence from the University of Wisconsin during the second semester of the past academic year. Professor Ogg is traveling in Europe and making a study of post-war constitutional and political conditions there; he will return to this country in time for a visit to the Institute of Politics at Williams- town, the meeting of the National Conference on the Science of Politics in Madison, and the opening of the university in September. The twenty-seventh annual meeting of the American Academy of , subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at Political and Social Science was held May 11 and 12, 1923, in Phila- delphia. The general subject of the meeting was America's relation to the European situation, and papers were presented dealing with the financial, the political, and general cultural and ethical aspects of the problem. Addresses were made by various members of the American 27 Sep 2021 at 16:54:25 Political Science Association. , on The Governmental Research Conference of the United States and Canada held its eighth annual meeting in Minneapolis, June 13 to 16 inclusive. 170.106.35.229 Professor Henry Jones Ford has retired from active teaching in Princeton University to become professor emeritus. Professor Ford . IP address: returned from abroad in May after completing his book on representative government which is soon to be published by Henry Holt and Company. Professor Isidor Loeb has been serving for several months as acting president of the University of Missouri. -
What Did the Direct Primary Do to Party Loyalty in Congress?1
WHAT DID THE DIRECT PRIMARY DO TO PARTY LOYALTY IN CONGRESS?1 Stephen Ansolabehere Department of Political Science Massachusetts Institute of Technology Shigeo Hirano Department of Politics New York University and Center for the Study of Democratic Politics Princeton University James M. Snyder, Jr. Department of Political Science and Department of Economics Massachusetts Institute of Technology March, 2004 1Professor Ansolabehere and Professor Snyder thank the National Science Foundation for its generous ¯nancial support. We thank Gary Jacobsen, John Huber, and seminar participants at Columbia University for their helpful comments. Abstract Between 1890 and 1920, most states adopted the direct primary as the method for nominat- ing candidates for the U. S. House. It was widely thought at the time that this mechanism would produce greater independence from the parties inside the legislature, would increase the defeat rate of sitting incumbents who were party stalwarts, and would produce greater independence of candidates from their parties in the general elections; this would take the form of decreased party loyalty in the legislature, and increased split ticket voting in the electorate. In this paper, we examine the panel of elections and roll call votes from 1890 to 1920 and ¯nd some evidence for these conjectures. Loyalty in Congress did fall among a state's congressional delegation following the introduction of the primary. Also, incumbent defeat rates for renomination and split ticket voting increased in states that introduced the primaries compared with states that did not. The data reveal, however, suggest that the pri- maries were not transformative. The e®ects of primaries on loyalty and elections, although statistically signi¯cant, they are quite modest and likely had only marginal e®ects on con- gressional politics, with one important exception. -
Defendant FEC's Motion for Summary
Case 1:15-cv-01241-CRC-SS-TSC Document 41 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 131 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ) LOUISIANA, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) Civ. No. 15-1241 (CRC-SS-TSC) ) v. ) ) FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, ) MOTION FOR SUMMARY ) JUDGMENT Defendant. ) ) DEFENDANT FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant Federal Election Commission (“Commission”) respectfully moves this Court for an order (1) granting summary judgment to the Commission pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rule 7(h), and (2) denying plaintiffs’ summary judgment motion (Docket No. 33). In support of this motion, the Commission is filing a Memorandum in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, a Statement of Material Facts and accompanying Exhibits, and a Proposed Order. Pursuant to the protective order entered in this case, the Commission is separately submitting under seal unredacted versions of its Statement of Material Facts and Exhibits that plaintiffs have designated as confidential. Respectfully submitted, Daniel A. Petalas (D.C. Bar No. 467908) Seth Nesin Acting General Counsel Attorney [email protected] [email protected] Lisa J. Stevenson (D.C. Bar No. 457628) Greg J. Mueller (D.C. Bar No. 462840) Deputy General Counsel — Law Attorney [email protected] [email protected] Case 1:15-cv-01241-CRC-SS-TSC Document 41 Filed 03/18/16 Page 2 of 131 Kevin Deeley /s/ Charles Kitcher Acting Associate General Counsel Charles Kitcher (D.C. Bar No. 986226) [email protected] Attorney [email protected] Harry J. -
The American Political Science Review
The American Political Science Review https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms BOARD OF EDITORS KENNETH C. COLE, FKITZ MORSTEIN MARX University of Washington Queens College ROBERT E. CUSHMAN, LENNOX A. MILLS, Cornell University University of Minnesota CLYDE EAQLETON, LOUISE OVERACKER New York University Wellesley College E. PENDLETON HERRING, DONALD C. STONE, Harvard University U. S. Bureau of the Budget , subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at WALTER H. C. LAVES, CARL B. SWISHER, University of Chicago Johns Hopkins University FREDERIC A. Oao, Managing Editor, University of Wisconsin 30 Sep 2021 at 17:49:05 , on VOLUME XXXIX 170.106.202.8 1945 . IP address: GEORGE BANTA PUBLISHING COMPANY MENASHA, WISCONSIN 1945 Reprinted with the permission of the American Political Science Association https://www.cambridge.org/core JOHNSON REPRINT CORPORATION JOHNSON REPRINT COMPANY LTD. Ill Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10003 Berkeley Square House, London, W.I. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400054824 Downloaded from . https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms , subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at 30 Sep 2021 at 17:49:05 , on 170.106.202.8 . IP address: https://www.cambridge.org/core First reprinting, 1969, Johnson Reprint Corporation Printed in the United States of America https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400054824 Downloaded from . CONTENTS NUMBER 1—FEBBUAKY, 1945 Congressional Control of the Public Service, Leonard D. White 1 The Dilemma of the Peace-Seekers, Frederick L. Schuman 12 American Government and Politics The Communist Party of the USA, Barrington Moore, Jr 31 https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms Dissent on the Supreme Court, 1943-44, C. -
Yale Law School 2018–2019
BULLETIN OF YALE UNIVERSITY BULLETIN OF YALE BULLETIN OF YALE UNIVERSITY Periodicals postage paid New Haven ct 06520-8227 New Haven, Connecticut Yale Law School 2018–2019 Yale Law School Yale 2018–2019 BULLETIN OF YALE UNIVERSITY Series 114 Number 10 August 10, 2018 BULLETIN OF YALE UNIVERSITY Series 114 Number 10 August 10, 2018 (USPS 078-500) The University is committed to basing judgments concerning the admission, education, is published seventeen times a year (one time in May and October; three times in June and employment of individuals upon their qualifications and abilities and a∞rmatively and September; four times in July; five times in August) by Yale University, 2 Whitney seeks to attract to its faculty, sta≠, and student body qualified persons of diverse back- Avenue, New Haven CT 06510. Periodicals postage paid at New Haven, Connecticut. grounds. In accordance with this policy and as delineated by federal and Connecticut law, Yale does not discriminate in admissions, educational programs, or employment against Postmaster: Send address changes to Bulletin of Yale University, any individual on account of that individual’s sex, race, color, religion, age, disability, PO Box 208227, New Haven CT 06520-8227 status as a protected veteran, or national or ethnic origin; nor does Yale discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity or expression. Managing Editor: Kimberly M. Go≠-Crews University policy is committed to a∞rmative action under law in employment of Editor: Lesley K. Baier women, minority group members, individuals with disabilities, and protected veterans. PO Box 208230, New Haven CT 06520-8230 Inquiries concerning these policies may be referred to Valarie Stanley, Director of the O∞ce for Equal Opportunity Programs, 221 Whitney Avenue, 4th Floor, 203.432.0849. -
Campaign Finance Regulation and the First Amendment Bradley A
Journal of Law and Policy Volume 6 Issue 1 INAUGURAL DAVID G. TRAGER PUBLIC Article 2 POLICY SYMPOSIUM: Campaign Finance Reform: Will Anything Work? 1997 The irS ens' Song: Campaign Finance Regulation and the First Amendment Bradley A. Smith Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp Recommended Citation Bradley A. Smith, The Sirens' Song: Campaign Finance Regulation and the First Amendment, 6 J. L. & Pol'y (1997). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol6/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Policy by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. THE SIRENS' SONG: CAMPAIGN FINANCE REGULATION AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT Bradley A. Smith* Listen with care to this, now, and a god will arm your mind. Square in your ship 's path are Seirenes, crying beauty to bewitch men coasting by; woe to the innocent who hears that sound,1 INTRODUCTION After the elections of 1996, it is clear that the campaign finance regulation system for federal elections is not working. At the presidential level, the system is in danger of becoming a mockery. Despite spending limits designed to keep campaign costs lower, it is estimated that, upon final tally, some $800 million will actually have been legally spent on the 1996 presidential race.2 At the con- gressional level, parties, candidates and interest groups have learned how to work around legal restrictions on contributions. The result is an increasingly dishonest campaign in which advertisements touting candidates are used for "party building," advertisements intended to help elect or defeat candidates pretend not to advocate such outcomes, and parties are forced to campaign independently of their candidates.3 * The author is an Associate Professor of Law at Capital University Law School and an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute. -
INSTITUTE of GO ERNMENTAL STUDIES UNI ERSITY of CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Aaron Wildavsky: a Memorial 1930-1993
J I Aaron Wildavsky: A Memorial 1930-1993 Working Paper 94-2 INSTITUTE OF GO ERNMENTAL STUDIES UNI ERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Aaron Wildavsky: A Memorial 1930-1993 Working Paper 94-2 Working Papers published by the Institute of Governmental Studies provide quick dissemination of draft reports and papers, preliminary analysis, and papers with a limited audience. The objective is to assist authors in refining their ideas by circulating research results and to stimulate discussion about public policy. Working Papers are reproduced unedited directly from the author's pages. Aaron Wildavsky 1930-1993 Class of 1940 Professor of Political Science and Pnblic Policy University of California, Berkeley From The Independent (London), Friday, IO, September 1993 Professor Aaron Wildavsky Aaron Wi/davsky, political scientist, writer on public affairs; horn New York City 31 May 1930; Assistant Professor, Oberlin College 1958-62; Professor, University ()f California, Berkeley 1963-93; Dean, School of Public Policy, Berkeley 1969-77; Fellow, American Academy of Arts and Sciences 1973- 93; President, Russell Sage Foundation, New York 1977-78; books include The Private Government of Public Money 1974; married 1955 Carol Shirk(deceased; three sons, one daughter; marriage dissolved), 1973 Mary Cadman; died Oakland, California 4 September 1993. To describe Aaron Wildavsky as the world's leading scholar in public administration makes him sound dry as dust; nothing could be further from the truth. He was as warm and earthy as the kasha that he made each Sunday for brunch at his home overlooking San Francisco Bay. Wildavsky was a professor of political science because he cared passionately about politics. -
Maine, Broadening the Tax Base, the Connecticut Plan of Equalizing Taxes for State Purposes, and the Crisis in Education Growing out of the Tax Situation
NEWS AND NOTES 115 Maine, broadening the tax base, the Connecticut plan of equalizing taxes for state purposes, and the crisis in education growing out of the tax situation. Twenty-ninth Annual Meeting of the American Political Science As- sociation. Sixteen years ago, the fourteenth annual meeting of the Associ- ation was held at the Bellevue-Stratford Hotel in Philadelphia. The https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms country was at war with Germany, and the program of the meeting was studed with titles of papers and discussions called out by the tense inter- national situation. On December 27-29, 1933, the Association's twenty- ninth meeting was held in the same hotel in the same city, and the pro- gram abounded in titles of papers and discussions called out by another war in which the country was engaged—a war this time upon economic depression, and one for which the nation had lately been mobilized almost as dramatically as in 1917. On the former occasion, 125 members registered at the meeting; on the latter, 360, comparing with 200 at Detroit in 1932, 353 in Washington in 1931, and 317 at Cleveland in 1930. Following practice of recent years, nearly all of the sessions took the form of round-table or section meetings, which were generally well attended. The program in full was as follows: , subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 27, AT 10 O'CLOCK 1. Government and Education. Chairman: Ben A. Arneson, Ohio Wesleyan University. (1) "The Goal of Civic Education in the United States," C. -
Reforming the Presidential Nominating Process
REFORMING THE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING PROCESS PAUL T. DAVID* It is the function of the presidential nominating process to identify the candidates who can be made the subject of a presidential election; it is the function of the general election to make the final choice. Because of this characteristic difference in function, the nominating process differs from the general election process in respects that are fundamental to the manner in which each should be conducted. An election for President, as long as the two-party system holds together, is essenti- ally a choice between two candidates, each of whom was formally identified some time in advance, has become familiar to the voters through active campaigning, and has the support in the election of a permanently organized national political party. None of these features is true of the nominating process. It has to begin in the first place by ascertaining the alternatives among whom a choice may be made, seldom deals with a choice between two candidates and only two, frequently involves a comparison between some candidates who are well known and others who are little known and goes on inside the political party from which support will be obtained-after the choice has been made. Much of what is most important in the nominating process occurs before there is any short list of definite candidates on whom to concentrate attention. These aspects of the process will be neglected here, moving on immediately to special char- acteristics of the nominating choice that become apparent after the field of candidates for a party nomination has become relatively clear.' SOME CHARACTErISTICs OF PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING CHOICE I. -
Party Primaries for Candidate Selection? Right Question, Wrong Answer
964 UNSW Law Journal Volume 34(3) PARTY PRIMARIES FOR CANDIDATE SELECTION? RIGHT QUESTION, WRONG ANSWER GRAEME ORR ∗ I INTRODUCTION Political parties act as gatekeepers to Parliament,1 and hence to law-making and ministerial government. Theirs is gatekeeping in a special sense, however. Occupational gatekeepers screen entrants to professions using defined and transparent measures. The process of becoming an MP, however, is a thoroughly political one. As Lord Hoffmann observed, ‘the main criterion is likely to be the popularity of the candidate with the voters … the candidate who, for whatever reason, seems … most likely to win’. 2 Along with that criterion, internal party ideology, rivalries and factionalism may play a part. Given the long-standing dominance by parties of electoral politics – and hence of Parliaments, law- making and executive governance – the gatekeeping role of parties is not merely a matter of internal party concern, but of considerable interest to the wider community and to public law itself. In the common law world, this parliamentary gatekeeping is described as candidate ‘endorsement’ or ‘preselection’. 3 These very terms imply that the process is within the party’s control. They assume a coherent, intentional body, identifiable as ‘the party’, which gives its imprimatur to candidates to contest general elections on its behalf. In contrast, candidate selection in the United States of America (‘US’) is taken out of the hands of parties, and placed in the hands of a broader electorate. Through the mechanism of the direct primary election, candidate selection in the US is more open, and even more political (in the public sense), 4 than elsewhere.