Filtering by
- Creators: School of Politics and Global Studies
- Creators: Lennon, Tara
Inspired by John Rawls and his life's work Justice as Fairness, I sought to measure how much political empathy a person has and then compare this to decision-making styles in search of any relation between the two. Political empathy is a term to refer to one's willingness to utilize governmental policy to help those who are the neediest because of the understanding that humans deserve equal treatment since no one is more human than anyone else. Because of current research I found that I can test political empathy because of empathy’s correlation with political ideology; specifically, that those who are more liberal have more empathy. I test participant’s ideology in a normal setting and then present them with the concept of Rawls’ Original Position to see if they shift more one way when presented with this idea which is supposed to make them think more empathetically.<br/>I have two hypothesis that I cover: first, that more people will shift in a more liberal direction between the two tests, and second, that those who have more political empathy make political decisions based more on emotion rather than facts and reason. I tested decision-making through a myriad of tests within a focus group so I could get multiple angles at the issue. My first hypothesis was proven incorrect and while I didn’t have enough participants in my focus groups to make a clear determination, it didn’t look like there was any correlation between political ideology and decision-making styles.
This project focuses on the effects of partisanship and electoral contestation on the likelihood of state legislators to adopt an independent ethics commission. Existing literature suggests that ethics reform is a function of public perception and the need to assuage public outrage in the face of scandal. Additionally, many legislators view ethics laws as suggestions of their own ineptitude and thus resist reform. However, this existing view fails to consider the unique nature of the enabling legislation of ethics commissions and often conflates external, public drivers of reform with internal drivers personal to the individual legislators. Using logistic regression and time series analysis, this project finds that increased durations of single-party control in state legislatures decreases the chances of that legislature having an independent commission, suggesting that legislators use the partisan ethics committees as political weapons when they are in power. When the dominant party does not face the risk of becoming the minority, there is little in place to motivate ethics reform, thus the lack of commissions. This research identifies the need to develop more focused measures of inter-legislator partisanship and suggests that the effects of different types of ethics laws, specifically those pertaining to ethics commissions, should more often be studied in isolation, rather than as one single category.
Despite George Washington’s warning against political parties, the United States we know today consists of two political parties that are becoming even more polarized. Since President Trump’s first run for the Republican party candidate and presidency, these partisan tensions have been recharged with further polarization and many individuals swearing on social media they would never date a Trump supporter. According to Pew Research Center, “45% [of Democrats and those who lean left who are currently seeking relationships] say they definitely would not consider seriously dating a Trump voter” (Brown 2020). The divide between parties and the importance of political beliefs amongst partners has appeared to only increase after the actions taken at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. My research aims to quantify this phenomenon and then discover the “why?” behind it. How many people really consider their partner’s partisan affiliation and political beliefs a deal-breaker? Further, is it a deal-breaker because of the individual’s identity and political beliefs? Using intersectionality as a framework to examine identity and the confluence of identifiers and oppressors, will allow for a deeper understanding and personal account of why individuals find partisanship to be such a big criterion in a partner.