Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection

In the current race for technological innovation, companies are striving to be the best and most prominent in the industry. A major way companies are setting themselves apart is through personalized experiences for their customers, so they have a huge incentive to collect consumer information. Consumers have limited knowledge of how much information companies collect and what goes on behind the scenes. Therefore, it is becoming extremely important to ensure companies are held accountable for upholding consumers’ right to privacy. One way this can be done is through the implementation of privacy legislation. The United States has not yet enacted federal preemptive privacy legislation, so this thesis examines the feasibility of enacting such legislation using the European Union’s GDPR as a model. California’s current state-level privacy law, the CCPA, is compared to the GDPR to determine the elements of a successful privacy law and find that the CCPA has many problems, most of which are solved by the GDPR. Because of this, it is concluded that it is necessary for the United States to adopt federal privacy legislation which would be most successful if the GDPR was used as a foundation.

This thesis is concerned with the political implications of two of Jacques-Louis David's paintings: Oath of the Horatii (1784) and The Lictors Bringing to Brutus the Bodies of His Sons (1789). In this thesis, I argue that David’s pre-Revolutionary work contained political anticipations of Revolutionary France articulated in his Neoclassical forms, the classical stories he chose to paint, his own narrative innovations using light, color, gender, unusual scenes and the thematic conflict of the state vs the individual and family.

The Electoral College, the current electoral system in the U.S., operates on a Winner-Take-All or First Past the Post (FPTP) principle, where the candidate with the most votes wins. Despite the Electoral College being the current system, it is problematic. According to Lani Guinier in Tyranny of the Majority, “the winner-take-all principle invariably wastes some votes” (121). This means that the majority group gets all of the power in an election while the votes of the minority groups are completely wasted and hold little to no significance. Additionally, FPTP systems reinforce a two-party system in which neither candidate could satisfy the majority of the electorate’s needs and issues, yet forces them to choose between the two dominant parties. Moreover, voting for a third party candidate only hurts the voter since it takes votes away from the party they might otherwise support and gives the victory to the party they prefer the least, ensuring that the two party system is inescapable. Therefore, a winner-take-all system does not provide the electorate with fair or proportional representation and creates voter disenfranchisement: it offers them very few choices that appeal to their needs and forces them to choose a candidate they dislike. There are, however, alternative voting systems that remedy these issues, such as a Ranked voting system, in which voters can rank their candidate choices in the order they prefer them, or a Proportional voting system, in which a political party acquires a number of seats based on the proportion of votes they receive from the voter base. Given these alternatives, we will implement a software simulation of one of these systems to demonstrate how they work in contrast to FPTP systems, and therefore provide evidence of how these alternative systems could work in practice and in place of the current electoral system.

People of color, and more especially Black Americans, make up a minuscule portion of annual National Park visitation. This podcast is a look into the prejudiced history surrounding the formation of the national parks, the modern theories surrounding continuing lack of park diversity, and personal accounts of where the movement for outdoor equality is going and where your support should go. This all culminates into a project that aims to understand why this statistic exists as it is and present it through podcast.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an international impact since the novel coronavirus first surfaced in late 2019. Since then, different countries have taken different approaches to try and limit transmissions and deaths. While this is seemingly unprecedented in modern day times, many pandemics, or plagues, have happened relatively frequently in history. This paper examines three historical plagues through the lens of social psychologist Geert Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions to distinguish between cultures: power distance, individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation and indulgence versus restraint. This paper then applies these dimensions to the modern day U.S. and South Korea, two countries who have had different success in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. Through these dimensions, this paper aims to explain a factor in why South Korea has had better results than the U.S. It also recognizes that Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are not the only factor to affect the pandemic, and explores political influences in America through the lens of Henry David Thoreau and John Dewey. Overall, this paper argues that the U.S. has been unsuccessful in taming the pandemic because of certain cultural dimensions, such as more an individualist and indulgent culture, and its unstable and divisive political climate. Given this, the United States has a hopeful, yet arduous path moving forward with COVID-19 and future pandemics.

The Electoral College, the current electoral system in the U.S., operates on a Winner-Take-All or First Past the Post (FPTP) principle, where the candidate with the most votes wins. Despite the Electoral College being the current system, it is problematic. According to Lani Guinier in Tyranny of the Majority, “the winner-take-all principle invariably wastes some votes” (121). This means that the majority group gets all of the power in an election while the votes of the minority groups are completely wasted and hold little to no significance. Additionally, FPTP systems reinforce a two-party system in which neither candidate could satisfy the majority of the electorate’s needs and issues, yet forces them to choose between the two dominant parties. Moreover, voting for a third party candidate only hurts the voter since it takes votes away from the party they might otherwise support and gives the victory to the party they prefer the least, ensuring that the two party system is inescapable. Therefore, a winner-take-all system does not provide the electorate with fair or proportional representation and creates voter disenfranchisement: it offers them very few choices that appeal to their needs and forces them to choose a candidate they dislike. There are, however, alternative voting systems that remedy these issues, such as a Ranked voting system, in which voters can rank their candidate choices in the order they prefer them, or a Proportional voting system, in which a political party acquires a number of seats based on the proportion of votes they receive from the voter base. Given these alternatives, we will implement a software simulation of one of these systems to demonstrate how they work in contrast to FPTP systems, and therefore provide evidence of how these alternative systems could work in practice and in place of the current electoral system.

People of color, and more especially Black Americans, make up a minuscule portion of annual National Park visitation. This podcast is a look into the prejudiced history surrounding the formation of the national parks, the modern theories surrounding continuing lack of park diversity, and personal accounts of where the movement for outdoor equality is going and where your support should go. This all culminates into a project that aims to understand why this statistic exists as it is and present it through podcast.

Over the past couple of years, the focus on the prevalence of hate-speech and misinformation on the internet has increased. Lawmakers feel that repealing or reforming Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act is the way to go, considering that the law has been used to protect companies from any liability in the past. In this podcast series, I will be explaining what Section 230 is, how it affects us, and what changes are being proposed. In doing so, I wish to shed a light on how the problems of the internet are not solely in the hands of social media giants and a 26-word long law, but all its users that make up our global community.

In light of the 2020 Presidential election, accusations regarding early voting methods have risen as a topic of debate among active voters. In order to ensure the voter’s trust in voting methods, it is important to analyze whether such accusations are truthful or just dramatized speculation. Do early voting methods negatively infringe on the integrity the U.S. election process? Using gathered voter statistics and conducted partisan research within recent elections, this defense examines the impact early voting has had through the analysis of two of its most controversial claims. The author finds that there exists little to no reasonable support to conclude existence of infringement to the integrity of the election process, and the reasons that explain this topic’s rise in popularity lies in the failure to accept defeat and the notion of fear.

The Constitution is a document that was made over 200 years ago by a population that could have never imagined the type of technology or social advances made in the 21st century. This creates a natural rift between governing ideals between then and now, that needs to be addressed. Rather than holding the values of the nation to a time when people were not considered citizens because of the color of their skin, there need to be updates made to the Constitution itself. The need for change and the mechanisms were both established by the Framers while creating and advancing the Constitution. The ideal process to go about these changes is split between the formal Article V amendment process and judicial activism. The amendment process has infinite scope for changes that can be done, but due to the challenge involved in trying to pass any form of the amendment through both State and Federal Congresses, that process should be reserved for only fundamental or structural changes. Judicial activism, by way of Supreme Court decisions, is a method best applied to the protection of people’s rights.