2008 Conference Program - Midwest Political Science Association
2008 Conference Program - Midwest Political Science Association
2008 Conference Program - Midwest Political Science Association
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Thursday, April 3-12:45 pm<br />
Paper<br />
Disc.<br />
Who Are the Individual Donors to Gubernatorial and State<br />
Legislative Elections<br />
This paper will present the first findings from the first large-scale<br />
survey of private individual contributors to gubernatorial and state<br />
legislative election campaigns.<br />
Michael J. Malbin, Campaign Finance Institute<br />
mmalbin@cfinst.org<br />
Peter William Brusoe, American University<br />
pbrusoe@cfinst.org<br />
Wesley Y. Joe, Campaign Finance Institute<br />
wjoe@cfinst.org<br />
Jamie P. Pimlott, Niagara University<br />
jamie.pimlott@gmail.com<br />
Clyde Wilcox, Georgetown University<br />
cwilcox3@cox.net<br />
Dorie Apollonio, University of California, San Francisco<br />
dorie.apollonio@ucsf.edu<br />
42-8 ELECTING JUDGES<br />
Room UEH 407 on the 4th Floor, Thur at 12:45 pm<br />
Chair Rachel Paine Caufield, Drake University<br />
rachel.caufield@drake.edu<br />
Paper Campaign Contributions, Judicial Decisionmaking, and<br />
Institutional Context<br />
This paper undertakes a multi-state study of the relationship<br />
between attorney contributions to state judicial candidates and<br />
judicial decision-making. We further show how state-level<br />
institutional variation may condition the money-votes relationship.<br />
Damon M. Cann, University of Georgia<br />
dcann@uga.edu<br />
Christopher W. Bonneau, University of Pittsburgh<br />
cwbonneau@gmail.com<br />
Paper Leaving the State Bench: Strategic Departure Decisions of State<br />
Court Judges<br />
We examine departure decisions of judges in elective states,<br />
focusing on voluntary departures to determine whether some judges<br />
time their decisions out of consideration of the governor’s ability to<br />
appoint their replacement in the states considered.<br />
Jolly A. Emrey, University of Wisconsin, Whitewater<br />
emreyj@uww.edu<br />
Lisa M. Holmes, University of Vermont<br />
Lisa.M.Holmes@uvm.edu<br />
Paper New Judicial Politics: Interest Groups in State Supreme Court<br />
Races<br />
This paper uses cross-sectional time series to analyze the recent<br />
rise of interest group involvement in state Supreme Court elections.<br />
Findings demonstrate the influence of institutions and governors,<br />
controlling for other factors.<br />
Kathleen Hale, Auburn University<br />
halekat@auburn.edu<br />
Ramona McNeal, University of Northern Iowa<br />
mcnealr@uni.edu<br />
Jason A. Pierceson, University of Illinois, Springfield<br />
jpier2@uis.edu<br />
Paper Determinants of State Supreme Court Regulation of Election<br />
Law<br />
This study investigates state court regulation of redistricting and<br />
electoral disputes. The study examines how partisanship and state<br />
judicial selection play a role in judicial decision making.<br />
Mark Jonathan McKenzie, Texas Tech University<br />
mark.mckenzie@ttu.edu<br />
Paper<br />
Disc.<br />
Voter Rolloff in Intermediate Appellate Court Elections<br />
Examines levels of rolloff in Intermediate Appellate Court elections<br />
from 2000-2006, both overall as well as the conditions (partisan<br />
vs. nonpartisan elections, amount of campaign spending, etc.) that<br />
influence rolloff.<br />
Matthew J. Streb, Northern Illinois University<br />
mstreb@niu.edu<br />
Brian P. Frederick, Bridgewater State College<br />
bfred34@hotmail.com<br />
Casey LaFrance, Northern Illinois University<br />
tlafranc@niu.edu<br />
Rachel Paine Caufield, Drake University<br />
rachel.caufield@drake.edu<br />
43-2 LEGITIMACY AND THE UNITED STATES<br />
SUPREME COURT (Co-sponsored with Judicial<br />
Politics, see 42-30)<br />
Room UEH 410 on the 4th Floor, Thur at 12:45 pm<br />
Chair Lawrence B. Solum, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign<br />
lsolum@gmail.com<br />
Paper Is the Supreme Court Bulletproof<br />
Preliminary experimental results from a recent study suggest<br />
that concerns about the Supreme Court's legitimacy are largely<br />
unfounded.<br />
Dion Farganis, Bowling Green State University<br />
fargard@bgsu.edu<br />
Paper Constitutional Responsibility<br />
We specify the conditions under which sovereign peoples and<br />
individual citizens, when they live in polities with unelected judges<br />
and entrenched constitutional norms, are morally responsible for the<br />
state of their constitutions.<br />
T. J. Donahue, Johns Hopkins University<br />
tdonahu3@jhu.edu<br />
Andras Szigeti, Central European University<br />
szigetia@ceu.hu<br />
Paper Judicial Review as an Instrument of Popular Sovereignty<br />
Constitutional courts perform monitoring, signaling, and<br />
coordination functions that both encourage government obedience<br />
to courts and mitigate the principal-agent problem at the heart of<br />
democratic government.<br />
David Law, University of California, San Diego<br />
davidlaw@ucsd.edu<br />
Paper Strength in Numbers A United Front and U.S. Supreme Court<br />
Legitimacy<br />
Previous work on the Supreme Court suggests the Court may<br />
expend institutional legitimacy to legitimize policies. The authors<br />
use a survey experiment to explore how agreement or conflict<br />
between the Court and Congress affects public opinion.<br />
Eve M. Ringsmuth, University of Minnesota<br />
ringsmuth@umn.edu<br />
Kjersten R. Nelson, University of Minnesota<br />
nels1561@umn.edu<br />
Disc. Lawrence B. Solum, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign<br />
lsolum@gmail.com<br />
117
Change language