Matching Items (16)
Filtering by
- Creators: School of Politics and Global Studies
- Status: Published
Description
Although smaller and more local elections could have implications more dramatic to an individual than larger district-, state-, and nation-wide elections do, very few citizens vote in them. Moreover, citizens are limited in procuring further information on candidates, issues, and the overall election when there are fewer sources of such information across various mediums. While existing literature on political communication and voter participation does not yet extend far enough to sufficiently address the most local aspects of media effects on elections, the political science field’s dominating frameworks would suggest that an increase in news media, social media, and ground mobilization tactics would increase civic engagement and voter participation. My research, which focuses on hyperlocal elections, both supports andrefutes certain elements of that suggestion. Based on surveys of potential voters in a university’s student government election and a school board election, interviews with two student government presidential candidates, and an analysis of social media engagement, my research compares three mass media platforms and two elections to characterize the effects of media on hyperlocal elections—that certain tactics have drastically different results on different populations. My research expands the body of media and politics knowledge to include hyperlocal elections, suggesting that civic engagement on the local levels require increased further study.
ContributorsRomanov, Andrew Samuilovich (Author) / Wells, David (Thesis director) / Brodie, Mark (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Department of English (Contributor) / Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2015-05
Description
Political scientists have long recognized the importance of representation as being critical to the American form of government. This paper begins by establishing the theoretical basis for representational studies in political science. It then turns to the empirical question of measuring the degree to which legislators represent their constituents. While there have been comprehensive studies of representation among members of Congress, several practical difficulties have prevented similar studies at the state legislature level. Underlying measures of representation are the preferences of constituents and the representational behavior of legislators. This paper proposes two metrics, a modified Partisan Voting Index and the American Conservative Union State Legislative Ratings, to compare the district-level preferences with roll call voting behavior (a form of substantive representation) of the corresponding legislators. This methodology is then tested against data collected from the Arizona legislature, specifically incorporating election returns from 2012, 2014, and 2016, and votes taken during the 2017 and 2018 sessions of the legislature. The findings suggest a strong relationship between the partisan and ideological leaning of a state legislative district and how conservative or liberal a legislator’s voting record is, even when controlling for political party. Two special cases are also examined in the context of this data. First, the three legislative districts with a split delegation are analyzed and determined to have a moderating effect on representative behavior. Second, five mid-term vacancies are examined along with the process for filling a vacancy. The paper concludes with a discussion of how this line of research can better inform legislators and help constituents hold their elected officials to account.
ContributorsFairbanks, Austin Kyle (Author) / Herrera, Richard (Thesis director) / Thomson, Henry (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
In this paper I conduct a comparative analysis of how proportional representation electoral systems could affect the political representation of racial and ethnic minorities if adopted in America. In order to do this I first discuss the central ideas of proportional representation in conjunction with a historical and contemporary view of the American electoral system. Using this discussion as a basic framework I enter a more in depth discussion about the pros and cons of PR systems, especially in so far as party lists, district magnitude, and links between constituent and representative. To better contextualize the American electoral system I then use case studies featuring New Zealand, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, and Germany. These case studies discuss important aspects of each country's electoral system and how they have affected ethnic and racial minorities within those countries. Each case study concludes with an assessment of how a similar system might work if adopted in America which aims to inform a broader discussion about electoral reform. Finally I conclude with a discussion of my findings that recognizes how proportional representation systems open new pathways for minority representation, while still urging caution in viewing those systems as a straightforward solution to the chronic underrepresentation of America's ethnic and racial minorities in politics.
ContributorsNeu, David (Author) / Kittilson, Miki (Thesis director) / Simhony, Avital (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
While the negative humanitarian effects of sanctions are widely known, scholars and policymakers often assume these costs are geographically localized. This research questions these assertions by examining the relationship between economic sanctions and refugee flight. I argue that the imposition of sanctions produces refugees for two reasons. First, in the face of rising prices and stagnant wages, people are forced to leave in order to survive. Second, sanctions increase the level of state-sponsored repression, forcing refugees to flee political violence. The empirical results offer initial support for this theory and suggest that sanctions may promote a contagion effect that could have negative consequences for regional economic and political stability.
ContributorsTruax, Timothy Christian (Author) / Thies, Cameron (Thesis director) / Wood, Reed (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
South Sudan claims the position of being the newest state in the world, formed by a referendum on separation from Sudan held in 2011. The referendum comes after a half a century of fighting, which led to the displacement of an estimated four million South Sudanese and the death of two million. The massive numbers of displaced people fled to Northern Sudan or surrounding countries, crossing borders and becoming refugees. A comparatively small number were repatriated into countries of second asylum, such as the United States. Arizona, a state with relatively cheap cost of living and a large amount of low-skilled jobs became a favored state for resettling refugees. In 2013, the South Sudanese population in the greater Phoenix area was estimated to be around 4,000. This paper is an exploration of the how South Sudanese refugee youth identify themselves, and find their place in a new country, and in Phoenix, without losing their roots. This paper concludes that South Sudanese refugee youth have a hyphenated identity. They identify as both proud South Sudanese and as American citizens. This identity is formed by strong ties to the South Sudanese community and education by parents on the one hand, and integration in American schools and norms on the other hand. Having a hyphenated identity also affects the work that these South Sudanese do and their relationships with South Sudan. This research also highlights the difficulties with theorizing immigration and identity, by placing discussions of integration and transnationalism in concert with the voices of actual immigrants. The findings in this paper are developed from 12 oral history interviews of South Sudanese in conjunction with existing scholarly literature on refugees, South Sudan, and identity.
ContributorsDooling, Carmel Inez (Author) / Holian, Anna (Thesis director) / Gallab, Abdullahi (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
This thesis analyzes the print-media coverage of female candidates for public office in Arizona. Former research has found that, historically, female candidates receive less overall coverage, less issue coverage, and more coverage focused on appearance and family in comparison to their male counterparts. Such biased coverage has countless detrimental effects on female candidates in influencing the public's perception of their viability as candidates and their ability to perform in office. To explore how female candidates in Arizona are treated by their local print media, I specifically analyzed how the two largest newspapers in Arizona, The Arizona Republic and Arizona Daily Star, covered Janet Napolitano as a gubernatorial candidate in 2002. In the first chapter, I compared general election coverage of Napolitano to that of her male opponents Matt Salmon, Richard Mahoney, and Barry Hess. In the second chapter, I compared in-depth general election articles about Napolitano to in-depth general election articles about Jan Brewer during her campaign for governor in 2010. From the first chapter, then, I could analyze coverage differences between female and male candidates, and from the second chapter I could examine coverage differences between female candidates with very different lifestyles. In conjunction, these two chapters produced a broad picture of the media climate for female gubernatorial candidates in Arizona.
ContributorsSchiller, Kelsey Marie (Author) / Simpson, Brooks (Thesis director) / Bluhm, Michael (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants, and undocumented immigrants have been a prominent part of American culture and have been woven into the history of the United States. Both group's presence in the United States has elicited rhetoric from U.S citizens and U.S public officials. One may infer that the narrative of Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants overlaps the narrative of undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Both Muslim refugees and immigrants as well as unauthorized immigrants, are criminalized in the United States, or are associated to crime by default of their faith and or their legal status. The association that Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants, and undocumented immigrants have with crime, based on their rhetoric, has elicited a policy from the United States government as well. The United States government has responded to a presumed threat that both groups pose to U.S. citizens and the nation by means of aggressive legislation, both local and federal. In this research paper, past and present discourse on Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants and undocumented immigrants was analyzed to determine each of the group's narrative; the mainstream media, newspapers and photographic images, was also considered to determine the narrative of both groups. Based on the discourse on Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants and on undocumented immigrants, the media portrayal of both groups, and on the change of public policy one may assert that the narratives of both groups overlaps; as both Muslim refugees and immigrants and unauthorized immigrants are seen as a possible threat to the American people.
ContributorsGalvan, Brigitte Magdalena (Author) / Doty, Roxanne (Thesis director) / Magaña, Lisa (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
"Phoenix as Refuge: A Photographic Exploration of Refugees Within the City" was a creative thesis project that aimed to bridge the gap between divided communities by creating awareness of refugees within the city of Phoenix. Through an IRB approved research study, multiple refugee families were interviewed and photographed. The project documented refugees and their stories and then made those interviews accessible to the greater Phoenix community. The purpose was to make the Phoenix community more aware of refugees in the hopes that this awareness would increase community activism and advocacy for this resilient yet vulnerable minority group. This paper explains the refugee resettlement process and addresses the social and economic implications of refugee resettlement and advocacy within an urban area. Many inhabitants of Phoenix are unaware the refugees that live in their city because of the geographic divide between social classes and ethnic groups. In highly urbanized communities, the geographic layout of the city leads to a more individualistic and segregated society. This notion leads to a discussion of Robert Putnam's theory of social capital, which argued that by improving and fostering social connections, one could increase social well-being and even make the economy more efficient. This paper then applies Putnam's ideas to the interaction between refugees and non-refugees, using space as a determining factor in measuring the social capital of the Phoenix community. As evident in the study of Phoenix's geographic divide between social and economic classes, Phoenix, like many urban cities, is not designed in a way that fosters social capital. Therefore, advocacy must go beyond people and into advocacy for a different kind of city and place that sets up refugees, and non-refugees alike, to succeed. In this way, rethinking the city through urban planning becomes integral to making new social networks possible, building social capital, and increasing social welfare in urban spaces.
ContributorsRutledge, Chloe Grace (Author) / Sivak, Henry (Thesis director) / Larson, Elizabeth (Committee member) / School of Art (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-12
Description
The purpose of this thesis was to answer the research question of how do states and international agencies, respectively, differ in application of efforts towards implementation of refugee rights, status, and protection and/or resettlement and why these differences occur. The respective refugee crises that arose following the Bosnian war in the 1990s and the Syrian civil war happening in the present day were used as case studies to further examine and answer this question. These case studies were chosen due to their relatively large refugee populations and differing causes for said refugee populations. To properly measure efficacy of refugee policies on a state and international level, the dispute of state sovereignty versus the right to international intervention was focused on and assessed exhaustively throughout this paper. It was determined that sovereignty could only be deemed legitimate and free of international intervention if certain basic functions (keeping the peace, upholding human rights, etc.) were being upheld within a territory's borders. In the cases of both Bosnia and Syria, the lack of protection and rights provided for refugees warranted international intervention, yet that intervention was not always carried out in the most efficient manner. This paper sought to elaborate on why international intervention occurred when it did and whether it was more powerful than state sovereignty. In the end, international agencies would be most effective in implementing refugee policies if individual states complied with those set policies. Until then, the battle between international policies and the proper implementation of those policies by individual states will remain an intricate one.
ContributorsAouad, Dina Ghassan (Author) / Sivak, Henry (Thesis director) / Larson, Elizabeth (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / W. P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
Description
The right to cast a meaningful vote, equal in value to other votes, is a fundamental tenet US elections. Despite the 1964 Supreme Court decision formally establishing the one person, one vote principle as a legal requirement of elections, our democracy consistently falls short of it. With mechanisms including the winner-take-all format in the Electoral College, disproportioned geographic allocation of senators, extreme partisan gerrymandering in the House of Representatives, and first-past-the-post elections, many voters experience severe vote dilution. <br/><br/>In order to legitimize our democratic structures, American elections should be reformed so every person’s vote has equal weight, ensuring that the election outcomes reflect the will of the people. Altering the current election structure to include more proportional structures including rank choice voting and population-based representation, will result in a democracy more compatible with the one person, one vote principle.
ContributorsSluga, Allison Leigh (Author) / Hinojosa, Magda (Thesis director) / Gartner, David (Committee member) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor, Contributor) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05