Center for the Study of Democratic Politics

Peter Enns is an assistant professor in the Department of Government at Cornell University. His primary research and teaching interests focus on public opinion, representation, and quantitative research methods. His work has been published in the American Journal of Political Science, British Journal of Political Science and Presidential Studies Quarterly and he is co-editor of the book Who Gets Represented? While at Princeton, he will be working on a book about the relationship between public opinion and mass incarceration in the United States.

Miriam A. Golden is Professor of Political Science at the University of California at Los Angeles. She has diverse interests in the area of comparative political economy. Currently her major research project concerns corruption in rich and poor democracies, with particular attention to India as well as Italy. She has been a visiting scholar at the Russell Sage Foundation, served as Chair of the American Political Science Association's Organized Section in Political Economy, and been a recipient of multiple grants from the National Science Foundation, the International Growth Centre, and the Governments of Quebec and Canada. Her article on "Electoral Systems, District Magnitude and Corruption" was awarded the Lawrence Longley Award for the best article in representation and election systems. She will be devoting her time at CSDP to a book-length manuscript on corruption in democratic countries, both rich and poor.

Isabela Mares (Ph.D., Harvard University, 1999) is Associate Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. Her research and teaching interests include comparative political economy and comparative social policy. She is the author of The Politics of Social Risk: Business and Welfare State Development (Cambridge University Press 2003), which won the Gregory Luebbert Award of the American Political Science Association for the best book in comparative politics. Her book Taxation, Wage Bargaining and Unemployment (Cambridge University Press, 2006) explores the consequences of the growth of the fiscal burden on employment outcomes in advanced industrialized economies. Prior to joining the Columbia Political Science Department in 2006, Professor Mares was Assistant and then Associate Professor of Political Science at Stanford University. While at CSDP, she will focus on a new project on electoral reforms in early 20th century Europe, seeking to develop an account of the variation in the persistence of “imperfections” in voting technology that shaped electoral competition and the electoral disenfranchisement of voters.

Monika Nalepa is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame. She was born in Warsaw, Poland and received her PhD at Columbia University's Political Science Department. She has taught at Rice University, and held a post-doc at the Harvard Academy of International and Area Studies. She recently published "Captured Commitments: An Analytic Narrative of Transitions with Transitional Justice," in World Politics and Skeletons in the Closet: Transitional Justice in Post-Communist Europe with Cambridge University Press. She has also published in the Journal of Conflict Resolution, the Journal of Theoretical Politics, and the Taiwan Journal of Democracy. At CSDP she will be using disaggregated voting records to study the transition from a consensus-based to a majoritarian-dominated parliament, using the example of the Polish Sejm.

Jeffrey A. Segal is SUNY Distinguished Professor and chair of the political science department at Stony Brook University. He has also served as Global Research Fellow at the Hauser Global Law School Program at the NYU School of Law and as a Fellow in the Law and Social Sciences Program at Northwestern University. He has a Ph.D. in political science from Michigan State University (1983). He is co-author of seven books, including Majority Rule or Minority Will: Adherence to Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court (Cambridge 1999, with Harold Spaeth) which won the C. Herman Pritchett Award for best book in law and judicial politics, and The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model (Cambridge 1993, also with Harold Spaeth) which won the Wadsworth Award (2005), for book or article, ten years or older, that has had a lasting influence on the field of law and courts. His articles include "Predicting Supreme Court Cases Probabilistically: The Search and Seizure Cases, 1962-1981" (American Political Science Review, 1984), which also won the Wadsworth Award (2002) for lasting influence. His article "The Supreme Court During Crisis" (NYU Law Review, 2005, with Lee Epstein, Daniel Ho, and Gary King) won the McGraw-Hill Award (2006) for best article published by political scientists on law and courts. Segal has served on the Board of the Law and Social Sciences Program at the NSF and as President of the Midwest Political Science Association. While at CSDP, he will be researching the historical responsiveness of the Supreme Court during wars and other crises. This project uses data from all cases involving Civil Rights and Liberties from the Supreme Court's first decisions in 1793 until today.

Kate Baldwin will be an assistant professor of political science at the University of Florida beginning in August 2011. She completed her Ph.D. in political science at Columbia University this spring, and was a fellow at the Alexander Hamilton Center for Political Economy at New York University during the 2009-10 academic year. Her dissertation examines the effects of non-elected traditional leaders on democratic politics in Africa, drawing on original surveys, experiments and interviews she conducted in rural Zambia. Her broader research program examines political accountability in new democracies, with a regional focus on sub-Saharan Africa. During her year at CSDP, Kate will be conducting research on the extent of democratic accountability and the basis on which voters evaluate politicians in contexts where the state has a limited role in the provision of public goods and services.

Rikhil Bhavnani is a political science Ph.D. candidate at Stanford University. He will begin an assistant professorship at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in fall 2011. His paper examining the long-term effect of electoral quotas for women was recently published in the American Political Science Review. He has also studied the effects of malapportionment in parliamentary systems, the costs of migration, the extent and correlates of political corruption, and other topics in political and economic development, primarily in South Asia. While at Princeton, Rikhil will work on a series of papers that leverage natural, survey and field experiments to study the causes and effects of—and remedies for—political inequality.

Adam Bonica is a Ph.D. candidate in the Wilf Family Department of Politics at New York University. His dissertation concerns the role of ideology in American politics, with a methodological focus on spatial modeling and ideal point estimation. He is currently engaged in two major research projects. The first develops a new empirical method for estimating ideological positions from campaign finance records. Adam is using this new method to assess the extent to which recent trends in campaign finance have contributed to partisan polarization. His second project seeks to generate high quality survey data on public preferences regarding the federal budget by employing an interactive questionnaire that forces respondents to make budgetary trade-offs. This technique provides a superior measure of fiscal preferences and a rich environment for ideological analysis and exploratory public opinion research.

Frederick Solt is an assistant professor of political science and sociology at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. His primary research interests are in comparative politics, and focus on the consequences of economic inequality for political attitudes and behavior. His work on this topic has appeared in the American Journal of Political Science, the British Journal of Political Science, and Political Behavior. To facilitate this research, he created and maintains the Standardized World Income Inequality Database (SWIID), which provides the most comparable data available on income inequality for countries around the world over the past half-century. While at Princeton, he will be writing a book examining the relationship between economic inequality and nationalism.

Michael Jones-Correa is professor of government, director of the Program in American Studies, and director of the Committee for the Study of Ethnicity, Race and Immigration at Cornell University. He is the author of Between Two Nations: The Political Predicament of Latinos in New York City (Cornell, 1998), which won the APSA's Race, Ethnicity and Politics book award, and the editor of Governing American Cities: Inter-Ethnic Coalitions, Competition, and Conflict (Russell Sage Foundation, 2001). He is also a co-principal investigator for the Latino National Survey and co-author of a forthcoming book based on the resulting data, Making it Home: Latinos Lives in America. While in Princeton he will be studying the political incorporation of new immigrants beyond traditional "gateway" cities.

Diana Mutz is Samuel A. Stouffer Professor of Political Science and Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, where she directs the Institute for the Study of Citizens and Politics in the Annenberg Public Policy Center. Mutz is a two-time winner of the APSA's Robert Lane Prize for the best book of the year in the field of political psychology, once for Impersonal Influence: How Perceptions of Mass Collectives Affect Political Attitudes (Cambridge, 1998) and again for Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative Versus Participatory Democracy (Cambridge, 2006). She is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a former fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, among many other distinctions. Her primary project during her year in Princeton will be a book-length study of the politics of mass opinion toward trade and globalization.

David Nickerson is assistant professor of political Science at the University of Notre Dame. He has published 14 scholarly articles and book chapters in his four years there, many of which report the results of field experiments focusing on electoral mobilization. His work has received awards from the political psychology and political methodology sections of APSA and from Oxford University Press, among others. He will be working on a book providing a theoretical framework for empirical research on voter engagement.

David Rueda is professor of comparative politics and Fellow of Merton College at Oxford University. His work on the political economy of industrialized democracies has appeared in World Politics, American Political Science Review, and the British Journal of Political Science, and in Social Democracy Inside Out: Government Partisanship, Insiders, and Outsiders in Industrialized Democracies (Oxford, 2007). He has been a visiting scholar at the Juan March Institute in Madrid, the London School of Economics, and the Amsterdam School for Social Research, and currently holds a two-year British Academy Research Development Award. He will be collaborating with Jonas Pontusson on a book focusing on the consequences of changes in income inequality for party politics and voter mobilization in advanced capitalist systems.

Jeffrey E. Cohen is Professor of Political Science at Fordham University. His major teaching and research interests focus on American political institutions and public policy, especially the presidency, mass media, and economic policy. He has published extensively in major political science journals, including American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, and Journal of Politics. He is currently the editor of the "Polls" for Presidential Studies Quarterly. His books include Presidential Responsiveness and Public Policy, which won the 1998 Richard E. Neustadt Award of the Presidency Research Group of the American Political Science Association. While at CSDP, Jeff will be continuing his work on presidential policy formation, addressing questions that are rarely considered in the literatures on agenda setting or the presidency by examining the president’s legislative policy agenda from 1789 to 2002.

Carrie Konold is a PhD candidate in political science at the University of Michigan, and expects to complete her degree in the spring of 2009. She studies comparative politics with a focus on public opinion and religion and politics. Her dissertation research examines the character, extent, and theoretical implications of challenges to secularism in democratizing Muslim countries. She has collected and analyzed data on public attitudes and values underlying support for democracy and secularism in Senegal. She has also conducted research in Algeria, and has written on perceptions of corruption and on generational politics in developing countries.

Beth L. Leech is Associate Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University. Her primary research interests involve the roles of interest groups, social movements, and the mass media in the making of public policy. She is currently involved in a project funded by the National Science Foundation that examines policy argumentation and issue definition by interest groups in Washington, and she is writing a book on interest group lobbying strategies. In 2005 she received the Emerging Scholar Award from the Political Organizations and Parties section of the American Political Science Association. Her publications include Basic Interests: The Importance of Groups in Politics and Political Science, written with Frank R. Baumgartner, as well as numerous articles and book chapters. As a Visiting Scholar at CSDP, Beth will complete a book manuscript, Meeting at Grand Central: Culture and the Evolution of Cooperation, as well as a series of journal articles dealing with problems of collective action in agenda-setting processes.

Leslie J. McCall is Associate Professor of Sociology at Northwestern University. Her interests include social inequality, economic and political sociology, and social theory. Her work on racial, educational, and gender inequality has appeared in a variety of scholarly journals as well as in her book, Complex Inequality: Gender, Class, and Race in the New Economy, which was the first runner-up for the C. Wright Mills Book Award. Her current research projects include an ongoing study of economic inequality among women, an analysis of the impact of corporate restructuring on rising inequality, and an investigation of the political consequences of rising wage inequality. Her work has been funded by the National Science Foundation, the Russell Sage Foundation, and Demos: A Network of Ideas and Action, where she is a Senior Fellow. During her year at CSDP, she will be writing Who Cares About Inequality?, a book about American views of income inequality, opportunity, and redistribution.

Milan Svolik is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. His research interests are in comparative and international politics, particularly the political economy of institutions, and formal political theory and statistical methodology. His current research focuses on the politics of authoritarian regimes and the politics of democratic transitions and consolidation. He is working on a series of papers that investigate power-sharing, the personalization of power, political institutions, and accountability in authoritarian regimes. In his research on democratic consolidation, he develops a new empirical approach to the study of democratic survival and consolidation and a theory that relates democratic consolidation to the evolution of the party system and economic performance in young democracies. An empirical part of the latter project is forthcoming under the title "Authoritarian Reversals and Democratic Consolidation" in the American Political Science Review.

Dinissa Duvanova is an Assistant Professor in the political science department at State University of New York, Buffalo. She received her Ph.D. from the Ohio State University. Her research interests include comparative political institutions, interest group politics, political economy of the post-communist transitions, and issues of democratization and state building in Eastern Europe and the new states of Eurasia. Her research examines the political and institutional foundations that underlie the creation and development of business associations in the post-Communist countries of Eastern Europe and Eurasia. It explores the causal factors that condition different patterns of business organizational development across countries and economic sectors and investigates roles and strategies adopted by the post-communist business community. Currently Duvanova is involved in two additional research projects: the quantitative analysis of China’s domestic market integration (in collaboration with Mary Cooper) and an investigation of theoretical issues surrounding civil service reforms in Eastern Europe (with Katja Michalak). Her work has been published in Comparative Politics and Europe-Asia Studies.

Rodney E. Hero is the Packey J. Dee Professor of American Democracy in the Department of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame; he served as chairperson of the department from Fall 2002 through Spring 2007. His research focuses on U.S. Democracy and Politics, especially as viewed through the analytical lenses of Latino and Ethnic/Minority Politics, State/Urban Politics, and Federalism. He has published a number of research articles on these topics in scholarly journals, most recently including “Immigration and the Evolving American Welfare State: Examining Policies in the U.S. States,” in the American Journal of Political Science (51, 3, July 2007). His book, Latinos and the U.S. Political System: Two-tiered Pluralism, received the American Political Science Association's 1993 Ralph J. Bunche Award. He also authored Faces of Inequality: Social Diversity in American Politics, which was selected for the APSA’s Woodrow Wilson Award in 1999. He is also co-author of MultiEthnic Moments: The Politics of Urban Education Reform (2006) and author of Racial Diversity and Social Capital: Equality and Community in America (2007). He has served on the editorial boards of several prominent political science journals. Hero is currently (2007-08) President of the Midwest Political Science Association, and also served as a Vice President of the American Political Science Association (2003-2004).

Thomas Sattler received his Ph.D. from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, Switzerland, in 2007. His dissertation analyzes the interaction between governments and financial markets in open economies using formal theoretical and quantitative empirical research methods. Before coming to Princeton, he was a Visiting Junior Professor at the University of Konstanz, Germany, a Visiting Scholar at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, and also taught at the University of Zurich, Switzerland.

In his current research, Thomas Sattler studies the impact of international economic integration on political accountability in different economic policy areas. The project examines how political institutions, particularly electoral systems and central bank independence, affect policymakers’ responsiveness to citizens’ evaluations of economic policies and whether these institutions influence the government’s ability to effectively shape economic outcomes. The empirical analysis establishes the dynamic relationships among popular preferences, government policies and economic developments in different countries using multi-equation time-series models.

Ismail K. White (Ph.D., Michigan, 2005) is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at The Ohio State University. He studies American politics with a focus on African American politics, public opinion, and political participation. His current research projects include a study of the effects of racial cues on political evaluations, an investigation into the racial origins and consequences of felony disenfranchisement provisions, and a study examining Americans’ beliefs about the genetic origins of race and gender. Work from these projects has appeared in the American Political Science Review, Public Opinion Quarterly, Journal of Black Studies and Virginia Journal of Law and Social Policy.

Cesar Zucco Jr. received his PhD in Political Science at UCLA. He is broadly interested in Latin America and the region's politics. His core research is on executive-legislative relations in multiparty polities, but he is also interested in electoral politics, the meaning and measurement of ideology, the interaction of economics and politics, and the politics of poverty.

Cesar’s dissertation examines how Latin American presidents use their ample control over state resources to obtain political support in multiparty legislatures, and shows the effects of both ideology and the exchange of pork and patronage for support in presidential coalition building. In order to do this, he estimates ideology from sources other than roll-call votes and shows that legislative roll call analysis does not reveal the standard left-right ideological structure, but rather a government vs. opposition cleavage that is induced by the president's handouts to parties and individual politicians. The dissertation includes a model of optimal presidential coalition building strategy that shows how presidents will distribute resources to parties and individual legislators, depending on the size and ideological positions of the parties in the particular political system. Several empirical tests show that the model captures an important element of the reality of presidential coalition building in multiparty political systems, namely that in countries such as Brazil, Bolivia, and Uruguay, presidents shape the way legislators behave through the exchange of resources for votes.

Edward G. Carmines is Warner O. Chapman Professor of Political Science and Rudy Professor at Indiana University. He is also the Research Director at the Center on Congress at Indiana University. Professor Carmines has published research on public opinion, party identification, political behavior, and research methodology in the top journals of the discipline including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, and The Journal of Politics. The author/co-author of seven books, Professor Carmines is currently working on two book projects, one with Jessica Gerrity and Michael Wagner focusing on public attitudes toward Congress, and the other with co-authors J. Merrill Shanks, Henry Brady, and Douglas Strand about the importance of issues in the 2004 election. Two of his books, Issue Evolution (with James A. Stimson) and Reaching Beyond Race (with Paul Sniderman) have won the American Political Science Association’s Kammerer Award for Best Book in the Field of U.S. National Policy. Professor Carmines was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University in 2000-2001.

Patrick Egan is a Ph.D. candidate in the Charles and Louise Travers Department of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley. He studies public opinion, public policy, and their relationship in American politics using formal and empirical research methods. His dissertation, titled “Issue Ownership and Representation in the United States,” examines how “issue ownership”--the varying degree to which the American public trusts the two parties to handle different policy issues--allows candidates and parties to take positions that are unresponsive to public opinion. In the dissertation, the concept of issue ownership is incorporated in a formal model of two-party electoral competition. This generates the prediction that candidates exploit issue ownership to take positions that are more extreme than the preferences of the typical voter. The theory is confirmed by examining the relationship between opinion in Congressional districts (drawn from the National Annenberg Election Survey) and Congressional roll-call votes cast on a range of issues.
 

Egan is currently involved in two additional projects: research that examines the substantial rise in Americans' favorability toward gay rights (co-authored in part with Kenneth Sherrill), and a volume (co-edited with Nathaniel Persily and Jack Citrin) exploring American public opinion on controversial issues before the United States Supreme Court. Before graduate school, he served as an Assistant Deputy Mayor for Policy and Planning for the City of Philadelphia under former mayor Ed Rendell.

Daniel Gingerich is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Government, Harvard University. His doctoral thesis, Corruption in General Equilibrium: Political Institutions and Bureaucratic Performance in South America, examines the relationship between political institutions and the modes of patronage politics in Bolivia, Brazil and Chile. This work draws upon extensive survey research conducted with the participation of nearly 3,000 public employees in the aforementioned countries. Daniel’s primary research interests include corruption (theoretical and empirical approaches), Latin American politics and the impact of electoral institutions.

Karen Long Jusko is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of Political Science, at the University of Michigan, with major specializations in quantitative methodology and comparative politics. With the support of a National Science Foundation Empirical Implications of Theoretical Models (NSF-EITM) fellowship for advanced graduate training in formal and empirical methods, she came to Princeton University as a visiting student in September 2003. Her research has been supported by a Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) Dissertation Fellowship, a SSHRC Federalism and Federations Dissertation Supplement, and research grants from the National Poverty Center, and the Luxembourg Income Study.

Her dissertation research addresses the following questions: How do electoral rules affect the poor? How responsive are elected governments to the interests of low-income citizens? When do parties have an incentive to seek the support of the low-income citizens? These questions structure a comparative analysis of the relationship between antipoverty policy and electoral rules, and establish the foundation of a research agenda motivated by broader questions about the relationship between democratic ideals and democratic practice.

Tasha Philpot is an Assistant Professor of Government at the University of Texas at Austin. She is also affiliated with the Center for African and African American Studies and the Center for Women's and Gender Studies. She specializes in American Politics. Her particular interests are in African-American Politics, Public Opinion and Political Behavior, Political Communication, and Political Parties. She received her B.A. from Marquette University, her M.P.P. from the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Michigan. Her research examines the consequences of using racial images in political communication. Her work has been published in The American Journal of Political Science, Political Behavior, Public Opinion Quarterly, National Political Science Review, and the Journal of Politics. In addition, she is the author of Race, Republicans, and the Return of the Party of Lincoln (2007, University of Michigan Press), which examines the circumstances under which political parties can use racial symbols to reshape their images among the electorate.

Robert D. Putnam is Malkin Professor of Public Policy at Harvard University. Raised in a small town in the Midwest and educated at Swarthmore, Oxford, and Yale, he is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and of the American Philosophical Society, a Fellow of the British Academy, and past president of the American Political Science Association. His recent books include Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2003); Democracies in Flux: The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society (2002); Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2000); Disaffected Democracies: What’s Troubling the Trilateral Countries? (2000); Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (1993); Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics (1993); and Hanging Together:The Seven-Power Summits (1984). His books and articles have been translated into eighteen languages. Making Democracy Work was praised by the Economist as "a great work of social science, worthy to rank alongside de Tocqueville, Pareto and Weber," and both MDW and Bowling Alone are among the most cited publications in the social sciences worldwide in the last several decades. He has taught at the University of Michigan and Harvard and served on the staff of the National Security Council. He has also served as Dean of the Kennedy School of Government and Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences at Harvard. He is currently working on three major empirical projects: (1) the changing role of religion in contemporary America, (2) the effects of workplace practices on family and community life, and (3) practical strategies for civic renewal in the United States in the context of growing social and ethnic diversity.

Bethany Albertson is a doctoral candidate in political science at the University of Chicago. Her general research interests are political psychology, public opinion, race and religion in the United States. She is currently completing her dissertation, which examines the ways that politicians use religious language, and how these persuasive messages affect political attitudes and choices in the United States. This project combines survey data with a series of original experiments to evaluate the ways that Americans with different religious beliefs process these messages, and how religious considerations interact with competing predispositions to simplify or complicate political choices. The specific focus on religion is used to contribute to more general theories of coded communication, implicit processes, and ambivalence.

Formerly the Dr. Kenneth L. Lay Professor of Political Science at the University of Houston, Robert Erikson is Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. He has written numerous journal articles on American politics and elections, and has coauthored American Public Opinion (currently in its seventh edition, 2004) and Statehouse Democracy (1994). His latest coauthored book, The Macro Polity, was published in 2002. Erikson is the former President of the Southwest Political Science Association, and former editor of the American Journal of Political Science.

Sanford Clark Gordon is an assistant professor of Politics at New York University. He received his B.A. from Cornell and his Ph.D. from Princeton. Broadly, his research concerns how political and economic elites respond to the incentives created by their institutional and informational environments. He has published articles on the electoral incentives of criminal prosecutors and trial court judges, the ability of corporate actors to employ political expenditures as signals to the bureaucracies that regulate them, and political methodology. He has also written on the function of challengers as auditors of incumbent behavior in competitive electoral systems, and the relationship between the political activities of corporate executives and the structure of their compensation.

Currently, Gordon is engaged in two major collaborative research projects. The first, with Catherine Hafer, concerns the incentives that Congress can create for regulatory agencies in the conduct of their enforcement responsibilities. These incentives may, in turn, motivate regulated firms to enter the political arena to obtain private benefits from those agencies rather than comprehensive legislation to benefit their entire industry. The second, with Gregory Huber, examines how state legislatures have placed constraints on the discretion of trial judges in light of the electoral incentives of both the legislators and judges.

Zoltan Hajnal is an assistant professor in the political science department at the University of California, San Diego and former research fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California. His research interests include minority representation, urban governance, inequality, political participation, and direct democracy. He is the author of numerous articles in journals such as The American Political Science Review, The Journal of Politics, Urban Affairs Review, and Social Science Quarterly. He recently received the American Political Science Association’s award for Best Paper on Urban Politics. He holds a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Chicago.

Hans Noel is a Doctoral Candidate in Political Science at the University of California at Los Angeles, specializing in political parties and ideology, and in American politics and methodology. His dissertation, "The Coalition Merchants: How Ideologues Shape Parties in America Politics," seeks to explain the source of ideology and how it influences politics. The dissertation treats ideology and party as alternative and often conflicting ways of organizing politics. These alternatives influence each other, but ideologues can be the stronger influence, both indirectly, by defining the political landscape in which parties compete, and directly, by capturing control of various party organs.

He is involved in several other projects on parties and ideologies, including Beating Reform: The Resurgence of Parties in Presidential Nominations (with Marty Cohen, David Karol and John Zaller), Without a Watchdog: The Effect of Local News on Political Polarization in Congress (with Marty Cohen and John Zaller) and We Thank Your For Your Support: Using the Address Market to Study Party Networks (with Gregory Koger and Seth Masket).

Hans received his BS in Journalism from Northwestern University in 1994 and later worked for a daily newspaper in Virginia. He is the co-director/co-producer of the award-winning feature film The Rest of Your Life.

Matthew Cleary is an assistant professor of political science at Syracuse University. He recently received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Chicago. Cleary has general research interests in democratic representation, democratization, ethnic politics, and Latin American politics. He is the author of Democracy and Indigenous Rebellion in Latin America(Comparative Political Studies, November 2000) and Electoral Competition, Citizen Influence, and Government Performance in Mexican Municipalities(Política y Gobierno, January 2003).

He is currently working on two major projects. Electoral Competition, Participation, and Government Performance in Mexico, based on his Ph.D. dissertation, explores the conditions under which electoral competition and other forms of political participation influence government responsiveness in Mexican municipalities. Trust and the Consolidation of Democracy (with Susan C. Stokes) uses original survey data from Mexico and Argentina to evaluate theoretical claims linking democratic consolidation to social or interpersonal trust. He is also formulating research agendas involving indigenous politics in Mexico and formal models of electoral accountability.

Rebecca Morton is a professor of politics at New York University. A Louisiana native, she received her MPA from Louisiana State University and her PhD from Tulane University. Substantively her research has focused on the electoral process, with a particular emphasis on the effects of different electoral institutions on electoral outcomes and the choices of candidates and voters. Her book, coauthored with Kenneth Williams, Learning by Voting: Sequence in Presidential Primaries and Other Elections (University of Michigan Press, 2001), addresses the effects of voting sequentially (as in presidential primaries in the United States or in elections with substantial mail-in and absentee voting) on the choices voters make and the candidates who win.

Methodologically, Morton has considered the complexity of empirical evaluation of formal models in the discipline of political science as well as used and advocated the use of laboratory experiments in such evaluations in her book, Methods and Models: A Guide to the Empirical Analysis of Formal Models in Political Science (Cambridge University Press, 1999). Both her methodological and substantive research have appeared in the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, the Journal of Law and Economics, Review of Economics and Statistics, Economics and Politics, and Social Choice and Welfare.

She has just completed a forthcoming text for advanced undergraduates and graduate students on the American Electoral Process for W.W. Norton Press and is currently in the process of completing a volume on Laboratory Experimental Methods with Kenneth Williams. Currently she is continuing her research on candidate nomination procedures by considering the causes and consequences of the expansion of direct voter involvement in party nominations worldwide. She is also expanding her experimental research on the behavior of voters in the electoral process.

Andrew Rudalevige is associate professor of political science at Dickinson College. He received his B.A. from the University of Chicago and his M.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard University. His main research interests are in the behavior and interaction of American political institutions, with a special focus on the executive branch and public administration. His first book, Managing the President's Program: Presidential Leadership and Legislative Policy Formulation, was published in 2002 by Princeton University Press and won the 2003 Richard E. Neustadt Award as the best political science book written on the presidency. A second, on the "imperial presidency" after Watergate, will be published in 2005 by the University of Michigan Press. Major current projects seek to explore the role of hierarchy in the informational economics of the Executive Office of the President and the role of the Office of Management and Budget in the presidential management of the wider executive branch.

From 1989-94, Rudalevige served as chief of staff to a member of the Massachusetts State Senate and then as an elected member of the city council in his hometown of Watertown. He is an avid fan of baseball and politics (and the politics of baseball) and is indoctrinating his children in the cult of the Red Sox Nation.

Boris Shor will be starting as an assistant professor at the Irving B. Harris School of Public Policy Studies at the University of Chicago in July 2005. He is currently concluding his PhD dissertation in Political Science at Columbia University. Returning to his alma mater, he received his AB in the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton in 1996.

His work focuses on the political patterns in the geography of federal spending in the United States. More generally, his primary interest is in the empirical analysis of the policy consequences of enduring political institutions. He is also currently involved in projects exploring the so-called blue-red state divide in the US, and the applicability of Bayesian multilevel models to time-series cross-sectional data.

He has also been working with Howard Rosenthal and Keith Poole on the Voteview project for the past decade (http://voteview.uh.edu/default.htm) and is involved in the successor projector, Voteworld (http://voteworld.berkeley.edu).

Richard Valelly is professor of political science at Swarthmore College, where he has taught since 1993. There he teaches the introduction to American politics, Congress, social and macroeconomic policy, an honors seminar on the American political system, and an introduction to social choice and game theory. He offers occasional electives on such topics as American political development, elections in the U.S., and the politics and law of voting rights. Before joining the faculty at Swarthmore he taught at MIT. He also has taught at Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania.

He has held residential fellowships at the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for Afro-American Research at Harvard, the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC and the Massachusetts Historical Society. In 1997 he held a research fellowship from the National Endowment for the Humanities.

He has just published his second book, The Two Reconstructions: The Struggle For Black Enfranchisement due out in October 2004 from the University of Chicago Press.

While at the Center, he will research and write about remote voting -- vote-by-mail, absentee balloting, and internet voting -- and what they mean for citizenship, as well as focus on the implementation of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and the impending struggle over the Voting Rights Act reauthorization.

He and his wife Nanette Tobin live in Swarthmore, PA with their two teenaged sons, Peter and Jonathan.

Dawn Brancati received her Ph.D. from Columbia University in May 2003 with distinction. Her dissertation entitled, Design Over Conflict: Managing Ethnic Conflict and Secessionism through Decentralization, looks at the conditions under which decentralization mitigates ethnic conflict and secessionism. Decentralization, it claims, intensifies ethnic conflict and secessionism when regional parties have a strong presence in the government. Although decentralization also increases the presence of regional parties in government, different aspects of a country's political system can be changed to modify the strength of regional parties in government. Her dissertation combines a large-N analysis of 19 countries around the world with cases studies of Spain, Czechoslovakia and India. When Dawn is not in front of her computer working, you will find her either jogging or playing with her yellow lab in the park.

Charles Cameron is associate professor of political science at Columbia University. He received his M.P.A. and Ph.D., from the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University. He specializes in American politics with research and teaching interests in applied formal theory and political institutions. He has taught at Columbia since 1989; in addition, he has taught at SUNY Stony Brook and New York University. Cameron has been a Research Fellow at the Brookings Institution, a National Fellow at the Hoover Institution, and a recipient of multiple grants from the National Science Foundation. His work has appeared in the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, and the Journal of Politics, as well as scholarly journals in economics and law.

He is the author of Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power (Cambridge University Press, 1998) which won the Richard Fenno Jr. Book Prize awarded for the best book on legislative studies published in 1998 and the William H. Riker Best Book Award given for the best book on political economy published in 1998. Currently, he is researching a book the politics of Supreme Court nominations.

Shigeo Hirano is an Assistant Professor of Politics at New York University. He recently received his PhD in Political Economy and Government from Harvard University. His dissertation was on the relationship between party and candidate reputations in Japanese and American electoral politics. He has a number of working papers on the recent Japanese electoral reforms, the Japanese personal vote, and the Populist Party's entry in 19th Century American politics. His current research includes projects on the Progressive movement in early 20th Century American politics, voting cues in non-partisan U.S. state legislatures, and the effect of direct primaries on third party entry.

Graeme Robertson is a doctoral candidate in Political Science at Columbia University. He received his B.A. in Philosophy, Politics and Economics from Oxford University, and his M.A. in Russian, East European and Central Asian Studies from Harvard University. He is the author of "Leading Labor: Unions, Politics and Protest in New Democracies" (Comparative Politics, forthcoming) and, with Alfred Stepan, of "An "Arab" More than "Muslim" Electoral Gap" (Journal of Democracy, July 2003).

His dissertation investigates the implications for democratic development of emerging institutions of interest articulation and representation in new democracies. Focusing on Russia, he presents a new theoretical perspective on patterns of worker protest and passivity during Russia’s economic crisis of the last decade. His work integrates the quantitative analysis of a comprehensive new database of protest events with detailed qualitative case research to link institutional features of the political economy to the capacity of regional elites to manipulate levels of strike activity, as part of a bargaining process with Federal authorities. Combining these elements, he shows how elite actors are able to manipulate popular protest in an environment, typical of new democracies, in which institutional constraints on the regional executives are weak. His research suggests that in such circumstances, the prospects for the emergence of representative liberal democracy are dim.

This research is part of a broader agenda that looks at the development of interest representation after the establishment of formal electoral institutions in the post-Communist states and elsewhere. In particular, he is interested in how institutions and practices inherited from previous regimes evolve and affect the development of new political and economic systems.

When not interviewing labor leaders in Siberia and the Far East, he supports other lost causes, such as the Scottish soccer team and the Boston Red Sox, and is an enthusiastic distance runner.

Dan Tichenor is Associate Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University, New Brunswick. His recent book, Dividing Lines: The Politics of Immigration Control in America (2002) received the American Political Science Association’s 2003 Gladys M. Kammerer Award for the best book in American national policy. He also received the 2003 Jack Walker Prize for an article on organized interests and American political development. His research interests include the American presidency, Congress, social movements, interest groups, immigration and citizenship politics, and public policy. He has been a Research Fellow in Governmental Studies at the Brookings Institution, the Abba P. Schwartz Fellow at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library, and a Faculty Fellow of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California, San Diego. He is a recipient of the Emerging Scholar Award of APSA’s Political Organizations and Parties Section. He is presently working on a book-length analysis of the dynamics of American interest group politics over time, titled A Question of Representational Bias (Cambridge University Press, forthcoming).

John G. Geer is Professor of Political Science at Vanderbilt University. Geer received his BA from Franklin and Marshall College in 1980 and his PhD from Princeton University in 1986. From 1986 to 1995, he taught at Arizona State University.

Geer is the author of "From Tea Leaves to Opinion Polls," "Nominating Presidents," and editor of "Politicians and Party Politics." He has also published articles on elections, campaigns, and public opinion, including an essay about the real meaning of L. Frank Baum's "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz."

Geer's current research focuses on attack politics in presidential campaigns and democratic governance. Unlike most pundits and political commentators, Geer contends that negativity in campaigns play an important, and largely underappreciated, role in advancing democratic politics.

John Huber is Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Rochester in 1991, and was on the faculty at Michigan for six years before joining Columbia in 1998. With Charles Shipan, he recently published Deliberate Discretion? Institutional Foundations of Bureaucratic Autonomy (Cambridge), which develops and test a comparative theory of delegation in advanced democracies. Huber's current research projects examine individual turnover among cabinet ministers in parliamentary democracies; the effects of bureaucratic capacity on delegation strategies; and the impact of legal structure on policymaking venues.

Valerie received her BA and MA degrees in International Relations with a focus on Middle Eastern Affairs and defense studies. She will receive her Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Washington in spring 2002.

Her current research investigates how relationships between national governing institutions help shape the U.S. immigration policy process from 1947 to 1998. I address the following problems: What happens to the immigration policy decisionmaking process when arrangements between governing institutions change? Do these shifts in inter-institutional arrangements inhibit or facilitate inhibit policy change? How do external economic and political factors interact with governing institutional factors in the policy process?

She investigated shifting arrangements in two areas: (1) shifts in competition between congressional committees over decision-making authority in all immigration matters and (2) shifts in the Supreme Court's deference relation to Congress on immigration matters regarding citizenship conferral to children of unmarried parents where one parent is a U.S. citizen. I find that competition between congressional committees over decision-making authority over immigration matters had an impact on the policy process along with changes in economic performance and partisan control. In the case of Court deference to congressional decision-making authority in matters of citizenship conferral, when the Court redefined the matter as one of constitutionality¡ªan area where the Court has jurisdictional authority, the Court stepped into the policy arena.

Her research has been supported by a number of institutions and fellowship organizations. I have been a Research Fellow at the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at University of California, San Diego. The C. Everett Dirksen Research Foundation provided generous support for my research on Court- Congress relations in immigration policymaking. I have also received support from the National Science Foundation and have been a Fellow of the International Migration Program of the Social Science Research Council. I would throw it all away for a soprano gig at the Metropolitan Opera.

David Karol is a Doctoral Candidate in Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles focusing on American Politics. He received his B.A. from Grinnell College, also in Political Science. His dissertation Coalition Management: How and Why Parties and Institutions Change Positions focuses on Issues in American Politics¡foese related questions: how do parties trade places on old issues and take positions on new ones and why are some issues marked by partisan conflict while others divide Congress and President regardless of their party affiliation?.

His interests within American politics are broad and include Congress and the Presidency, Parties, Interest Groups/Social Movements and American Political Development. He is also interested in the domestic sources of U.S. foreign policy. He is the author of Divided Government and U.S. Trade Policy: Much Ado about Nothing? in International Organization (Fall 2000) and co-author (with Marty Cohen, Hans Noel and John Zaller) of a forthcoming book, Beating Reform: The Resurgence of Parties in Presidential Nominations1980-2000. Before entering UCLA David worked in Washington in journalism and at the Brookings Institution.

Markus Prior (M.A., political science, Ohio State University) is a Ph.D. candidate in Communication at Stanford University. His dissertation analyzes the political implications of changes in the media environment over the last half-century. He examines the ways in which broadcast television, cable television and the Internet have altered the distribution of political knowledge and participation in the U.S. electorate. He argues that changes in the media environment help to explain both decreasing importance of party identification starting in the 1960s (for example in House elections) and the current resurgence of partisan polarization among voters.

Ken Shotts is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Northwestern University. His primary research interest is game theoretic models of American political institutions. He has published papers on racial gerrymandering, executive leadership, computer simulations of organizational behavior, ecological inference statistical methodology, and the Palm Beach County butterfly ballot. His current research projects investigate the role of information in elections and the effect of electoral incentives on policy choices made by government officials.

Professor Achen's book on aggregate data analysis (with Phil Shively of the University of Minnesota) appeared in 1995 from University of Chicago Press. His current project is a study of how unitary rational actor and bureaucratic politics models may be used to forecast foreign policy decision making. His research interests are American government and politics, formal political theory, research methods, world politics/international elations. His teaching interests are mathematical and statistical theory applied to electoral and party systems and to international relations.

Born and raised in Alberta, Canada, David earned a B.A. in political science from Brigham Young University, and is now a PhD candidate in the same subject at Harvard University. While at Harvard, his research has explored numerous aspects of American politics. These include how different types of religious institutions can, under certain circumstances, both encourage and discourage political participation; the increasing link between religion and Republican party identification among younger voters; how service learning can potentially contribute to social capital; and a comparison of the civic education provided by public and private secondary schools. David has an interest in education policy and has collaborated in research using randomized field trials to evaluate the effects of school vouchers. He and Paul Peterson have edited a book on vouchers and charter schools that will be published by the Brookings Institution Press in summer 2001.

David’s dissertation proposes a new theory to understand different motivations for political and civic (that is, non-political) activity. He hypothesizes that civic norms are inculcated in adolescence and persist over one’s lifetime, whereas political participation is facilitated by shorter-term factors.

More importantly, David and his wife Kirsten are the parents of two children, Katie (age 5) and Soren (age 2).

Marc Hetherington is Assistant Professor of Government and Legal Studies at Bowdoin College. He received his B.A. from the University of Pittsburgh in 1990 and his Ph.D. from the University of Texas at Austin in 1997. Before coming to Bowdoin in 1998, he taught at the University of Virginia. While his dissertation centered on the effect of the mass media on public opinion, his current research assesses the effect that declining political trust has had on the American public policy agenda. He argues that declining trust provides the most compelling explanation for why the public now apparently wants the government to do less. Some of his previous work has been published in the American Political Science Review and the American Journal of Political Science.

Keith Krehbiel is Edward B. Rust Professor of Political Science at the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University, where he has taught courses on foundations of political economy, legislative behavior, and business-government relations since 1986. He specializes in American politics and has published two books and dozens of articles on U.S. politics and governmental processes.

Krehbiel's first book, Information and Legislative Organization (University of Michigan Press, 1991) presents a comprehensive game-theoretic account of legislative behavior in the presence of uncertainty about the consequences of laws. The book also reports on a variety of novel empirical tests of the theory. The book received the American Political Science Association's Richard F. Fenno Prize for best book on legislative studies.

Krehbiel's second book, Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking (University of Chicago Press, 1998) studies the strategic interaction of the U.S. President and Congress. This book received both the Fenno Prize (for best book on legislative politics) and the Neustadt Prize (for best book on the presidency).

In addition to serving several terms on editorial boards of leading political science journals, Krehbiel has been a National Fellow at the Hoover Institution, a Guest Fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Congressional Fellow in the Senate Republican Leader's Office, and a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies in Behavioral Sciences. He has been a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences since 1994.

Rose Razaghian is a Ph.D. candidate in Political Science at Columbia University with a major in American Politics and a minor in Methodology. She received her B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley, in Political Science and Economics. Her dissertation, "Establishing Financial Credibility in the United States, 1789-1860," examines how the United States government created and secured its financial credibility during the ante-bellum period. Specifically, she argues that a combination of the institutional mechanism (including the absorption of debt incurred under the Articles, the Bank of the United States, and the Sinking Fund) and the reputation mechanism (timely payment of government debt, both principal and interest) allowed the United States government to become a creditworthy borrower. Her analysis includes both quantitative and qualitative methods. Rose is also interested in the relationship between the bureaucracy, the executive, and legislative branch; voting coalitions in Congress across policy areas; and agenda-setting patterns in Congress.

I am studying why people vote for ex-dictators, ex-coup plotters, and ex-torturers. I also analyze whether the former-authoritarians, once they become elected officials in new democracies, are less democratic than politicians who do not have anti-democratic antecedents. Argentina, Bolivia, and Venezuela are the countries in which I am researching these two questions. When I become a fellow at the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics I intend to examine this topic in Eastern and Central Europe as well, particularly in Belarus.

Jason Barabas received his Ph.D. in Political Science from Northwestern University. His research interests in American Politics include public opinion, political behavior, and public policy. He has written on deliberative democracy and how citizen policy discussion affects public opinion. Currently, he is investigating the extent to which stock market volatility affects public support for Social Security privatization, the nature of elite and mass opinion on foreign policy issues, and the use of statistical models to understand deliberation-driven changes in political knowledge.

Scott Desposato is a Ph.D. candidate at UCLA and a Fellow at the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics. His research is on the interaction of formal and informal institutions, especially electoral systems, voting behavior, and political parties, both in Latin America and the United States. He will join the Department of Political Science at the University of Arizona in August, 2001.

Jeffery A. Jenkins is a Fellow in the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University and an Assistant Professor of Political Science, Michigan State University. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 1999, and his research deals with theoretical and empirical analyses of the U.S. Congress and American Political Development. Professor Jenkins has published in the American Journal of Political Science, Legislative Studies Quarterly, Political Research Quarterly, Studies in American Political Development, and Public Choice.

Richard R. Lau, Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University, received his B.A. from Stanford University in 1974 and his Ph.D. in social psychology from UCLA in 1979. He taught at Carnegie Mellon University before coming to Rutgers in 1990. As a political psychologist, Lau has tried throughout his career to apply theories of individual cognition and behavior to political questions. His earliest research contrasted "self-interest" and "symbolic beliefs" as determinants of policy attitudes and political behavior, and the role of "negativity" (the tendency to give more weight to negative information than comparable positive information) in explaining political behavior and electoral outcomes. Lau is perhaps best known for promoting "information processing" theories of human cognition within political science. His own work in political cognition has focused on the effects of chronically accessible political constructs -- or political schemata -- on political perception and attitude change. His current research interests concern information search, heuristics, and choice strategies employed by voters during political campaigns, with an eye toward exploring the normative implications of these human decision making strategies; the role of "policy metaphors" in public opinion formation; and the effectiveness (and effects) of negative political campaigning. Some important publications include: Lau, Richard R., & David P. Redlawsk. "Voting Correctly." 1997. American Political Science Review, 91(September): 585-599. Lau, Richard R., Richard A. Smith, & Susan T. Fiske. 1991. "Political Beliefs, Policy Interpretations, and Political Persuasion." Journal of Politics, 53(August): 644-675. Lau, Richard R. 1989. "Individual and Contextual Influences on Group Identification." Social Psychology Quarterly, 52(September): 220-231. Lau, Richard R. 1985. "Two Explanations for Negativity Effects in Political Behavior." American Journal of Political Science, 29 (February): 119-138. Lau, Richard R., & David O. Sears, Eds. 1986. Political Cognition: The 19th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.