PSP Fall 2021 6

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.



FALL <strong>2021</strong><br />


FOREWORD 2<br />



The BYU Department<br />

of Political Science,<br />

consistent with the aims<br />

of a BYU education,<br />

intends to foster “Lifelong<br />

Learning and Service.”<br />

We hope to provide<br />

our alumni with<br />

intelligent, thoughtful<br />

and sophisticated<br />

analysis of important<br />

issues, and to act as<br />

a catalyst for service<br />

in our communities,<br />

neighborhoods, nations<br />

and the world.<br />







`17<br />



Publisher:<br />

Jay Goodliffe, Chair<br />

Editor:<br />

J. Matthew Clarke<br />

1<br />

2<br />

Graphic Designer:<br />

Sydney Freeman


August 26th, <strong>2021</strong><br />

Today is my favorite day on the BYU campus. It is the<br />

first day of new student orientation. I love the buzz in the<br />

air, and I love to see these kids bursting with excitement<br />

(and nervousness) about what lies ahead.<br />

Most of these students are very faithful Latter-Day Saints.<br />

But some of them come to us with serious concerns<br />

about their faith and their status in the church. They<br />

have deep questions that are hard to answer. Some are<br />

already rapidly proceeding towards the exits. As BYU<br />

faculty, we do everything we can to build their faith. We<br />

give them reasons to stay.<br />


FALL <strong>2021</strong><br />

Most of these students are mentally and emotionally<br />

strong, but a rapidly growing proportion come to us<br />

with depression and anxiety. As BYU faculty, we try to<br />

help strengthen them and steer them towards resources<br />

that can help.<br />

Most of these students come here loaded with privilege.<br />

They are very kind, good-hearted kids, but they don’t<br />

always see how that privilege has shaped their world. As<br />

BYU faculty, we try to help them see so that they can<br />

love their brothers and sisters with more empathy.<br />

Most of these students come to us brimming with<br />

confidence, but they will all face challenges. They<br />

discover quickly that BYU is an intellectually challenging<br />

place. They learn quickly that adulthood is laced with a<br />

variety of challenges they hadn’t anticipated. And some<br />

come to us with a history of abuse, neglect, disability, or<br />

economic hardship that has stolen their confidence. As<br />

BYU faculty, we teach all of our students that they are<br />

children of God with an unlimited, divine potential.<br />

Most of these students fit in quite easily socially, but too<br />

many feel they don’t belong. This may be due to their<br />

race or ethnicity, their economic background, their<br />

sexual orientation or identity, their family history, or<br />

any number of reasons. As BYU faculty, we welcome<br />

each of them. We let them know—regardless of where<br />

they come from—that they belong; they belong with us.<br />

So, to all you parents out there who have or hope to<br />

have your children join us at BYU, know that we, as BYU<br />

faculty, have your back. We will love your children as<br />

we love our own. We are not perfect, but they are safe<br />

with us.<br />


Outgoing Chair of the Department of Policitcal Science<br />

3<br />



Professors Jay Goodliffe and Darren Hawkins on the<br />

International Criminal Court<br />

3<br />

At the end of World War II, some idealistic states<br />

and non-state actors pushed for the creation of a<br />

permanent international court of human rights that<br />

would build on the success at Nuremberg, Germany<br />

where a series of military tribunals were held after WW<br />

II prosecuting prominent members of Nazi Germany<br />

for crimes against humanity. Yet most states, concerned<br />

about their sovereignty, strongly resisted such a court,<br />

even for the most heinous crimes. Over the next 40<br />

years, proponents kept proposals for a court alive in<br />

obscure United Nations (UN) study commissions but<br />

never made substantial progress.<br />

This is how Professors Jay Goodliffe’s and Darren<br />

Hawkins’ article entitled “A Funny Thing Happened on<br />

the Way to Rome: Explaining International Criminal Court<br />

Negotiations” (Journal of Politics, 71, 977-997), begins.<br />

At the end of the Cold War and in the face of brewing<br />

human rights troubles in Yugoslavia and Somalia,<br />

a few states decided to make a renewed push for an<br />

international court. The UN General Assembly (GA)<br />

delegated the task of creating a draft statute to the<br />

International Law Commission (ILC), an expert body<br />

of legal scholars that had studied the issue on and<br />

off during the previous decades. The Commission,<br />

well-experienced with state reluctance to actually do<br />

anything to protect human rights, produced an August<br />

1994 draft statute that envisioned a relatively weak<br />

International Criminal Court (ICC) that would serve as<br />

an agent of the Security Council.<br />

4<br />

Virtually everyone expected that only a relatively<br />

toothless Court that served the interests of powerful<br />

states could gain approval.<br />

The ICC, however, became the first and only<br />

permanent international court with jurisdiction to<br />

prosecute individuals for the international crimes of<br />

genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the<br />

crime of aggression. It was intended to complement<br />

existing national judicial systems, and it may, therefore,<br />

exercise its jurisdiction only when national courts are<br />

unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals. The ICC<br />

lacks universal territorial jurisdiction, however, and<br />

may only investigate and prosecute crimes committed<br />

within member states, crimes committed by nationals<br />

of member states, or crimes in situations referred to<br />

the Court by the United Nations Security Council.<br />

Some key characteristics of the ICC include: trials are<br />

fair, the prosecution is independent, defendant’s rights<br />

are upheld, victims’ voices are heard, participating<br />

victims and witnesses are protected, and the court<br />

engages in a two-way dialogue with communities that<br />

have suffered from crimes under its jurisdiction. The<br />

ICC has over 900 staff members, from 100 states, with<br />

six official languages: English, French, Arabic, Chinese,<br />

Russian and Spanish. So far, 30 cases have come before<br />

the Court, and ICC judges have issued 35 arrest<br />

warrants. The judges have issued 10 convictions and 4

acquittals, so far, since 2002, nearly 20 years since its<br />

inception.<br />

One key case at present is that of Ali Muhammad Ali<br />

Abd-Al-Rahman, who was transferred to the ICC's<br />

custody on 9 June 2020, after surrendering himself<br />

voluntarily in the Central African Republic. The initial<br />

appearance of Mr Abd-Al-Rahman before the ICC took<br />

place on 15 June 2020. According to the Prosecution's<br />

submission of the Document Containing the Charges,<br />

Mr Abd-Al-Rahman is suspected of 31 counts of<br />

war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly<br />

committed between August 2003 and at least April<br />

2004 in Darfur, Sudan. The confirmation of charges<br />

hearing took place on 24 -27 May <strong>2021</strong>.<br />

The next steps for Mr. Abd-Al-Rahman’s trial, include:<br />

After hearing the oral submissions of the Prosecutor,<br />

the Legal Representatives of the Victims and the<br />

Defense from 24 to 26 May, <strong>2021</strong>, the judges have<br />

entered their deliberations. The Pre-Trial Chamber<br />

shall deliver its written decision within 60 days of the<br />

date on which the confirmation hearing ends. This is a<br />

good example of how the court works.<br />

question: why did states create an institution to<br />

enforce international norms in such robust ways, even<br />

facilitating possible strong ICC action against highlevel<br />

government officials? Such behavior is puzzling<br />

because states that jealously guard their sovereignty<br />

have traditionally been reluctant to support<br />

international institutions with the ability to enforce<br />

international norms.<br />

The article argues that governments support (or fail to<br />

support) international institutions because they care<br />

deeply about potential reactions of the international<br />

partners on whom they depend for a diverse set of<br />

goods that range from trade to security to votes and<br />

support in international organizations. They labeled<br />

this set of partners as a “dependence network” and<br />

argue that leaders watch closely how<br />

(continued on page 24)<br />

To understand how the idea of the ICC evolved from<br />

a “toothless” Court, to one with substantial power,<br />

this article by Goodliffe and Hawkins analyzes the four<br />

formation years, from 1994 to 1998, when a “funny<br />

thing happened on the way to the Rome Statute”,<br />

before the ICC foundational documents were adopted<br />

in July 1998. States unexpectedly strengthened the<br />

ILC’s proposal for a weak Court in several ways: In the<br />

end, states endowed the Court with an independent<br />

prosecutor able to initiate cases, prevented the Court<br />

from falling under exclusive Security Council control,<br />

granted the Court automatic jurisdiction upon state<br />

ratification of the statute, and granted relatively<br />

permissive conditions under which the Court could<br />

exercise its jurisdiction. None of these provisions<br />

existed in the ILC’s original draft.<br />

The ICC was formally founded on July 1, 2002 in<br />

Rome, Italy, but has since found its seat in the Hague,<br />

Netherlands as an intergovernmental organization and<br />

international tribunal.<br />

The reach and teeth of the ICC provoke a compelling<br />

5<br />



PATTERSON'S <strong>2021</strong><br />




Today I would like to present something<br />

that Professor Karpowitz and I have been<br />

working on for years and is part of a<br />

larger book project on individualism. We<br />

have spent countless hours refining the<br />

measures. We have conducted multiple<br />

surveys, and we have presented the<br />

research in multiple academic venues. We<br />

want to present something today to honor<br />

Dean Hickman that is fresh and timely.<br />

anymore to Americans?<br />

Michael Sandel, in Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?, wrote<br />

that “The hollowing out of the public realm makes it difficult<br />

to cultivate the sense of solidarity and sense of community on<br />

which democratic citizenship depends.” (p. 267).<br />

The pandemic has made us particularly aware of whether or<br />

not America retains a vocabulary capable of helping us navigate<br />

through the demands of individualism and a public good.<br />

These are just a smattering of headlines that call attention to<br />

the dilemma, and the ways in which public life in America seems<br />

to be a war of all against all.<br />

Individualism as a word has increased in usage over the history of<br />

the republic. Individualism and the public good have increased,<br />

but they are not equal in usage. See chart below.<br />

5<br />

6<br />

The “Big” Question that we want to<br />

talk about today is the tension between<br />

individualism and regard for the community.<br />

This “question” has animated theorists and<br />

social scientists for centuries now, and it<br />

was certainly one of the major tensions at<br />

the heart of the American founding. James<br />

Madison wrote and defined “Factions” as “A<br />

number of citizens, whether amounting to<br />

a minority or majority of the whole, who<br />

are united and actuated by some common<br />

impulse of passion or interest, adverse<br />

to the rights of other citizens or to the<br />

permanent and aggregate interests of the<br />

community.”<br />

Alexis de Tocqueville made many<br />

observations about America and early<br />

on noted the character and qualities of<br />

American political life: Individualism is “a<br />

calm and considered feeling which disposes<br />

each citizen to isolate himself from the<br />

mass of his fellows and withdraw into the<br />

circle of family and friends;” “with this little<br />

society formed to his taste, he gladly leaves<br />

the greater society to look after itself”<br />

(Tocqueville 1969, 506, emphasis added<br />

)<br />

If Americans tend toward individualism,<br />

would it be possible to preserve a vocabulary<br />

of democratic citizenship? How does this<br />

individualism affect the way in which we<br />

interact in the public arena? Does the<br />

idea of a public arena even mean anything<br />

Certain phrases capture the essential qualities of individualism.<br />

Many, if not all of these phrases, have increased in usage over<br />

time. In this slide, the N-Gram analysis predicts the fifth word.<br />

So, whenever people say, “I do what I . . . ,” the N-gram analysis<br />

fills in the word that is most likely to follow: “I do what I . . . can,<br />

want, have, like, will, am, do, etc.” These are “Phrases associated<br />

with Individualism”.<br />

N-Gram analysis of “Do what you _______”: want, can,<br />

have, do, like, say, think, are, will, you please. Again, these are<br />

phrases associated with Individualism. Concepts associated with<br />

Individualism: N-Gram analysis of “no right or wrong_______”:<br />

answers, way, in, home, ways, to, about, responses, side.

What we want to examine today is the extent<br />

to which we might find a particular form of<br />

individualism to be at odds with some of the<br />

activities that are often associated with a<br />

regard for the public.<br />

Thinking about the meaning of individualism<br />

is at the core of this project: the relationship<br />

of self and authority. Individualism involves<br />

the individual as the primary or perhaps<br />

even sole source of all authority on matters<br />

of importance to that individual. And on<br />

that view, the individual has the capacity<br />

to determine the course of her life and the<br />

values that will define that life without outside<br />

interference. The term “individualism” is<br />

often attributed to “self-authorization.”<br />

Individualism is a value, but in political<br />

science it has been measured with a distinctly<br />

economic frame. Political scientists have<br />

identified a variety of “political values”.<br />

Among those are support for equality, liberty,<br />

welfare, and individualism. However, the<br />

operationalization of individualism has a<br />

distinctly economic frame. When discussing<br />

individualism, political theorists and social<br />

psychologists use the term in more than just<br />

an economic framework, however. Within the<br />

economic frame are prevalent ideas, such as:<br />

any person who is willing to work hard has a<br />

good chance at succeeding; but also, hard work<br />

offers little guarantee of success; most people<br />

who don’t get ahead should not blame the<br />

system, and they really have only themselves<br />

to blame; even if people are ambitious, they<br />

often cannot succeed; if people work hard,<br />

they almost always get what they want; but<br />

even if people try hard, they often cannot<br />

reach their goals.<br />

Two facets of individualism emerge when<br />

reading the philosophers and political theorists<br />

who have written about individualism. First:<br />

The belief that authorities external to the selfconstrain<br />

liberty, and; Second, The belief that<br />

only moral choices that are self-authorized are<br />

legitimate.<br />

We conducted two different surveys in the<br />

United States to test a different dimension of<br />

individualism to see if it might help explain<br />

current political attitudes and behaviors. The<br />

second survey was completed in July of 2020 in<br />

the midst of the pandemic.<br />

Results: moral individualism and the American<br />

dream. Those who score higher on the moral<br />

individualism scale are more likely to say that<br />

the American dream consists in the “freedom<br />

to do whatever you want” and “finding personal<br />

fulfillment.” Moral individuals are also less<br />

likely to say that “making a difference in the<br />

community” and “having a happy family” are<br />

important to them.<br />

Results: moral individualism and<br />

civic engagement. Those higher<br />

on the moral individualism<br />

score are least likely to identify<br />

any form of volunteering that<br />

they find enjoyable. So, moral<br />

individualism is associated with<br />

a decrease in indicating interest<br />

in any form of volunteering.<br />

They are also more likely to<br />

report that they did not engage<br />

in any political participation in<br />

the last year.<br />

Author David Linker used moral<br />

individualism to assess responses<br />

to the pandemic. “Underlying all<br />

of these sources of opposition to<br />

public-health measures is a deeper cause that<br />

intertwines with and underlies all of them, at<br />

least in part—and that is the old-fashioned, pigheaded<br />

individualism of the American people.”<br />

David Linker, American Individualism is a<br />

Suicide Pact.<br />

Our conclusions to this study so far:<br />

Individualism is a prominent American value.<br />

And Individualism has multiple subcomponents:<br />

“moral individualism” seems to be one of those<br />

subcomponents. And moral individualism<br />

promotes the self, but it makes it hard to promote<br />

collective efforts in various spheres, including<br />

politics and public health.<br />

Thank you, Dr. Patterson, for a fascinating ongoing<br />

study of American individualism.<br />

Pictured on top left:<br />

Dr. Kelly Patterson, Professor of Political Science, delivered the <strong>2021</strong><br />

Hickman Lecture on Thursday, March 22, <strong>2021</strong>. He has been with<br />

BYU since August of 1993, over 28 years, after receiving his PHD at<br />

Columbia University, and teaches courses in American Politics. What<br />

follows is an edited version of his Hickman Lecture:<br />

ISSUE<br />

31<br />

7<br />





SYSTEM<br />




CONFERENCE <strong>2021</strong><br />

Academic Council on the United Nation System<br />

The Annual Conference for the ACUNS<br />

was organized to take place at Fordham<br />

University in New York City, but due to<br />

lingering effects of the pandemic, once<br />

again, as with last year, the conference<br />

went entirely virtual through Zoom<br />

meetings.<br />

The <strong>2021</strong> Annual Meeting, 24-26<br />

June <strong>2021</strong>, featured an outstanding<br />

global effort with approximately 500<br />

participants spanning all the world’s<br />

time zones. The six headliner plenary<br />

sessions included the formal launch<br />

of the Global Governance Innovation<br />

Network. View the plenary sessions<br />

on the ACUNS YouTube channel. The<br />

Annual Meeting included 57 panels and<br />

roundtables and highlighted 12 recently<br />

published books.<br />

BYU Professor Kendall Stiles is one<br />

of the Editors in Chief of the ACUNS<br />

Journal “Global Governance: A review<br />

of Multilateralism and International<br />

Organizations”, and BYU Political<br />

Science is hosting the journal until 2023.<br />

This year’s annual conference, attended by<br />

Dr. Stiles, and Managing Editor Matthew<br />

Clarke, also from BYU Political Science,<br />

focused on “Toward a ‘Fit for Future’ United<br />

Nations System.” Some of the presentations<br />

included: a John W. Holmes Memorial<br />

Lecture by Mr. Mark Malloch Brown, a British<br />

diplomat and former member of the Labour<br />

Party, and Minister of State for Africa,<br />

Asia and the UN, and currently President<br />

of the Open Society Foundations; also, “A<br />

Conversation about Peacekeeping with Mr.<br />

Jean-Pierre Lacroix, UN Under-Secretary-<br />

General for Peacekeeping Operations” at the<br />

UN, etc.<br />

Some of the more important statements<br />

discussed during the conference were:<br />

It is through the UN that we can solve<br />

common problems of humanity; Achieving<br />

a UN that is “fit for purpose” is critical;<br />

Women as shapers of this transformation;<br />

gender equality is critical; COVID has had<br />

a disproportionate impact on women and<br />

people of color; developing countries must<br />

be less and less dependent on developed<br />

countries; developing countries must take<br />

care of their own system; The International<br />

Order is Anarchical; developed countries<br />

generally take care of themselves first, then<br />

help developing countries; Behavior of<br />

individuals is critical—how do people behave?<br />

How do we get people to do what they need<br />

to do? Countries with strong public health<br />

systems—Universal Healthcare—succeed<br />

better during events like a pandemic; The UN<br />

can help in leadership development—each<br />

country needs local leaders, and especially<br />

developing countries need leaders.<br />

7<br />


ISSUE<br />

31<br />

9<br />



Alexis de Tocqueville; (29 July 1805 – 16 April 1859), was a French<br />

aristocrat, diplomat, political scientist, political philosopher and<br />

historian. He is best known for his work Democracy in America (two<br />

volumes, 1835 and 1840) and The Old Regime and the Revolution (1856). In<br />

both, he analysed the improved living standards and social conditions<br />

of individuals as well as their relationship to the market and state in<br />

Western societies. Democracy in America was published after Tocqueville's<br />

travels in the United States and is today considered an early work of<br />

sociology and political science.<br />

As emphasized in Introduction to Book I of Democracy in America,<br />

the purpose of the work is somewhat beyond the American democracy<br />

itself, which was rather an illustration to the philosophical claim that<br />

democracy is an effect of industrialization. This focus on the philosophy<br />

of history justifies a certain ambiguity in using the word 'democracy'<br />

and explains why Tocqueville even ignores the intents of the Founding<br />

Fathers of the United States regarding the American political system.<br />

Tocqueville was an ardent supporter of liberty. "I have a passionate love<br />

for liberty, law, and respect for rights", he wrote. "I am neither of the<br />

revolutionary party nor of the conservative. [...] Liberty is my foremost<br />

passion". He wrote of "Political Consequences of the Social State of the<br />

Anglo-Americans" by saying: "But one also finds in the human heart<br />

a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to want to bring<br />

the strong down to their level, and which reduces men to preferring<br />

equality in servitude to inequality in freedom".<br />


ISSUE<br />

31<br />



11<br />

His view on government reflects his belief in liberty and the need for<br />

individuals to be able to act freely while respecting others' rights. Of<br />

centralized government, he wrote that it "excels in preventing, not<br />

doing".<br />

Tocqueville continues to comment on equality by saying: "Furthermore,<br />

when citizens are all almost equal, it becomes difficult for them to<br />

defend their independence against the aggressions of power. As none of<br />

them is strong enough to fight alone with advantage, the only guarantee<br />

of liberty is for everyone to combine forces. But such a combination is<br />

not always in evidence".<br />

Tocqueville explicitly cites inequality as being incentive for the poor to<br />

become rich and notes that it is not often that two generations within<br />

a family maintain success and that it is inheritance laws that split and<br />

eventually break apart someone's estate that cause a constant cycle of<br />

churn between the poor and the rich, thereby over generations making<br />

the poor rich and the rich poor. He cites protective laws in France at<br />

the time that protected an estate from being split apart among heirs,<br />

thereby preserving wealth and preventing a churn of wealth such as was<br />

perceived by him in 1835 within the United States.<br />

Source: Tocqueville, Alexis de (2000). Democracy in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, and https://<br />

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexis_de_Tocqueville.<br />




Curt Magleby<br />

After more than three decades lobbying for the auto industry, from 1988 to 2020, Curt<br />

Magleby retired from Ford at the end of a tumultuous year, though he says he's particularly<br />

proud of how the company has responded to the coronavirus pandemic.<br />

Magleby, Ford’s vice president of U.S. government relations until Dec. 31, 2020, said that<br />

the pandemic allowed for Ford to broaden its brand and, as a result, his scope as a lobbyist.<br />

The automaker assembled 50,000 ventilators to help with response efforts and announced<br />

in September it would donate 100 million masks through <strong>2021</strong>.<br />

Magleby began working for Ford in 1988. He had just received his master’s in business<br />

and started working in finance in the electronics division at the company’s Rawsonville,<br />

Mich., plant, where he quickly learned about the importance of personally representing<br />

the brand.<br />

He was eventually promoted to be Ford's top lobbyist in 2011, though unlike many in<br />

government relations, he never worked in partisan politics, a subject that came up during<br />

a meeting that year with the president of the United Auto Workers.<br />

Curt holds a BS and MBA from BYU and has been active in politics and lobbying much of<br />

his professional life.<br />

https://thehill.com/buGsiness-a-lobbying/business-a-lobbying/530157-fords-chief-lobbyist-retiring-we-representfamilies<br />

Curt Magleby with then Chairman Wiliam Clay Ford, Jr., Henry Ford's last remaining grandson.<br />

Rachel Sheffield<br />

Rachel Sheffield, new Chapter VP for Washington,<br />

DC, is a Senior Policy Advisor for the Joint Economic<br />

Committee, Office of Vice Chairman @SenMikeLee,<br />

and former @Heritage analyst in welfare policy,<br />

including: Faith, Family, Freedom. Rachel studied at<br />

BYU for her BS and MS.<br />


G. Kevin Jones<br />

G. Kevin Jones graduated with a BS<br />

degree Summa Cum Laude from<br />

Brigham Young University in I974 and<br />

received his JD Cum Laude from the<br />

same institution in 1977. He also holds<br />

an LL.M. (Master of Laws), 1984, degree<br />

from the University of Utah and an S.J.D.<br />

degree (Doctor of Juridical Science),<br />

1990, from the University of Virginia, the<br />

highest degree awarded for the study of<br />

law. He is admitted to practice law before<br />

the Utah Supreme Court, the United<br />

States District Court for the District<br />

of Utah, the Tenth Circuit Court of<br />

Appeals, and the United States Supreme<br />

Court.<br />

Jones is accomplished in law, has<br />

authored award-winning law review<br />

articles, and was active in the Mormon History Association serving for nearly 20 years as<br />

the Business Manager and Member of the Executive Committee of the Journal of Mormon<br />

History. He was an Attorney-Advisor in the Intermountain Regional Office of the Solicitor,<br />

United States Department of the Interior, Salt Lake City, Utah, serving as legal counsel<br />

to the Utah units of the National Park Service, the Upper Colorado Region, Bureau of<br />

Reclamation (federal water projects), and defending tort (personal injury) claims against<br />

the United States, 1980-<strong>2021</strong>. Jones has received numerous special achievement awards for<br />

his legal work in the Department of the Interior, has supervised the office intern program,<br />

and mentored over 75 law students from such schools as the University of Michigan, the<br />

University of Chicago, New York University, Notre Dame University, and Brigham Young<br />

University.<br />

ISSUE<br />

31<br />


13<br />

Kevin has supported writing at BYU Political Science through his awards for many years, and<br />

our students benefit significantly thereby. We thank him, sincerely, for the opportunities<br />

he has provided our students.<br />

Cade Clark<br />

Cade Clark, new Chapter President for Washington,<br />

DC, is Vice President of Government Affairs<br />

at Helicopter Association International (HAI).<br />

Headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, HAI members<br />

safely fly more than 5,000 helicopters some 2.3<br />

million hours each year. HAI is governed by a Board<br />

of Directors elected from the membership, with daily<br />

operations conducted by a dedicated professional<br />

staff. Cade studied at BYU for his Bachelors in Political<br />

Science, and Colorado State for MBA.<br />




Adam Roberts, Best Paper Award winner in G.<br />

Kevin Jones Sigma Writing Award<br />

Adam Roberts, a BYU student, received the<br />

Best Paper Award from the G. Kevin Jones<br />

Sigma Writing Awards for his work entitled,<br />

“Populism and Evangelicalism: A Crosscountry<br />

Analysis of Chile and the United<br />

States” ($1000 Sigma, <strong>2021</strong>)<br />

In the paper, he found that evangelicals<br />

are significantly more populist than<br />

other religious groups in the US, but in<br />

Chile evangelicals are not more populist than other groups. Evangelicalism, Roberts writes, is a<br />

Christian movement gaining in popularity throughout the globe, and is a trans-denominational<br />

movement found in almost every Protestant denomination and tradition including the Baptists and<br />

Pentecostal churches. In 2016, about two-thirds of all Protestants and one in four Christians were<br />

evangelicals, most of which live in the United States, where one-quarter of the nation’s population<br />

is evangelical. Adam examined cases in Chile and the US, and found that evangelical identity is<br />

associated with populist attitudes in the US, but not for Chile. Adam’s research as an undergraduate<br />

can help understand connections between many religious faiths and populism. Thank you, Adam,<br />

for an insightful paper, and congratulations on your first prize of $1,000.<br />

After working for a few years, Adam’s plan is to pursue a Ph.D. in Political Science, with a focus on<br />

quantitative political methodology. He would like to thank Prof. Kirk Hawkins for his help on this<br />

paper, as well as the professors at BYU who have helped him become a better writer.<br />

See his article at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/sigma/vol38/iss1/3/<br />

Kesley Powell, President of Women in Politics<br />

Kesley is a Sophomore studying Political<br />

Science with an emphasis in Political Strategy,<br />

and minors in History and Sociology. She is<br />

currently a research assistant for Jay Goodliffe<br />

and a research fellow with the Center for<br />

the Study of Elections and Democracy. She<br />

is interested in identity politics and the role<br />

minority groups play in the political system. In<br />

the fall, Kesley will be interning in Washington<br />

D.C. through the Washington Seminar<br />

program. Upon graduation, she plans to<br />

pursue a PhD in Political Science. In her free<br />

time, she enjoys camping, watching sports, and<br />

reading the news.<br />

13<br />


Jay Goodliffe<br />

Jay Goodliffe is the new chair of the<br />

BYU Political Science Department.<br />

As a Professor of Political Science, Jay<br />

specializes in American Politics and<br />

Methodology. He grew up in California—<br />

Walnut Creek and San Francisco—and<br />

in the Shaker Heights area of Cleveland,<br />

Ohio. Then his family moved to Salt<br />

Lake City where Jay graduated from<br />

East High School. Jay then went on to<br />

MIT for undergraduate work, studying<br />

aerospace engineering, with a minor in<br />

Political Science, pausing his studies to<br />

serve in the Taejon Korea Mission. Since<br />

he liked politics (and the career paths in<br />

political science), Jay attended graduate school in political science, turning his hobby<br />

(and undergraduate minor) into a career. Jay went to a quantitative program at the<br />

University of Rochester, and the applied the skills developed at MIT to substantive<br />

problems in Political Science. He received both his M.A. and Ph.D. in Political Science at<br />

the University of Rochester.<br />

ISSUE<br />

31<br />


15<br />

In the summer of 2018, under Jay’s direction, BYU hosted the 35th annual meeting for<br />

the Society for Political Methodology (“PolMeth”). Over 200 eminent scholars attended<br />

and presented papers at the conference.<br />

Money and Politics<br />

Much of Jay’s research has been on money and politics. He has found that money is<br />

necessary but not sufficient to win an election. Candidates use money strategically.<br />

Incumbents would like to raise money to scare potential opponents away, but that rarely<br />

works. Incumbents mostly raise and save money because they are risk averse: They do<br />

it because they are worried a strong challenger will enter the race and perhaps even<br />

outspend them. And all candidates are worried that outside groups like Super PACs will<br />

overwhelm the electoral contest with large sums of money. Thus, money is strategically<br />

used as insurance more than deterrence. See: Goodliffe, J. (2004). “War Chests as<br />

Precautionary Savings.” Political Behavior 26(4): 289-315.<br />

On the donor side, money is becoming more like voting. Most people do not donate in<br />

large sums to a Super PAC like George Soros and other billionaires. Most people donate<br />

a smaller amount directly to candidates like $100. What is their motivation? It is often<br />

for the same reasons that people vote: “I really like Trump,” or “I really like Biden,” (or<br />

“I really dislike Trump,” or “I really dislike Biden”). Donating is more prevalent than it<br />

was, as technology has made it easier to donate now. See: Magleby, D., Goodliffe, J. &<br />

Olsen, J. (2018). Who Donates in Campaigns? The Importance of Message, Messenger,<br />

Medium, and Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />

Although there is a lot of money in the campaign finance system, the money often<br />




comes in on opposing sides. If the money only came in on one side, then that money<br />

might be more influential, but if one side sees the opportunity for influence, the other<br />

side will recognize it an bring in money to oppose that influence. See: Magleby, D., &<br />

Goodliffe, J. (2018). Interest Groups in the 2016 Election. In David B. Magleby (Ed.),<br />

Financing the 2016 Election (pp. 87-129). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.<br />

Jay’s Goals for the Department as Our New Chair<br />

Jay’s vision for the department is to continue to foster the department’s strengths:<br />

outstanding students, strong staff, and wonderful faculty that are recognized in the<br />

profession for their achievements. Past Political Science chairs were excellent stewards<br />

of the department: Sven Wilson, Darren Hawkins, Ray Christensen, Kelly Patterson, and<br />

David Magleby. Jay is fortunate to have all of these previous department chairs still here<br />

to advise and guide him and the department.<br />

Dr. Elizabeth McGuire<br />

Dr. McGuire recently finished her PhD at Yale<br />

University, with her dissertation exploring how<br />

social groups affect the diffusion of gender norms<br />

and how women process female role models in<br />

politics. Her research focusing on gender politics,<br />

development politics, and African politics. She<br />

qualified in comparative politics, political economy and<br />

international relations.<br />

Dr. McGuire grew up primarily in the mountain west<br />

and is a graduate of Brigham Young University with<br />

a BA in International Relations (’13). She has conducted field research with Oxford<br />

University, the Center for Global Development, and IPA. Studying with Drs. Daniel<br />

Nielson and Michael Findley at BYU exposed McGuire to the career opportunities<br />

available for researchers. She participated in the mentored research abroad program in<br />

Uganda while an undergraduate, and learned the value of experimental research, as well<br />

as critical skills in project design and field research. She has consistently returned to the<br />

African continent to conduct field experiments since that time and enjoys the creativity<br />

and challenge of working with experiments in that context.<br />

Dr. McGuire joined the BYU Political Science faculty in the summer of <strong>2021</strong>.<br />

Dr. David Rommey<br />

15<br />

16<br />

David Romney, Assistant Professor of Comparative<br />

Politics, joined us in Summer <strong>2021</strong> after work at Harvard<br />

University, where he received his PhD in Government in<br />

2020 and was a postdoctoral fellow 2020–<strong>2021</strong>. Before<br />

attending Harvard, he received his B.A. in Middle East<br />

Studies and Arabic, with a minor in Modern Hebrew,<br />

from Brigham Young University in 2013.<br />

David studies intergroup relations, looking at how<br />

members of ethnic groups form attitudes and develop<br />

group norms toward others as well as how we can change those attitudes and norms<br />

to improve intergroup relations. He also studies social media, misinformation, and

conspiracy theories. In both research agendas, he uses a diverse set of methodological<br />

approaches, including lab and survey experiments, natural experiments, and<br />

computational textual analysis. His research projects primarily focus on the Middle East,<br />

where he has spent close to a year total in Jordan and Israel, but he has done research<br />

abroad in India and at home in the United States as well.<br />

Professor Richard Davis Retires<br />

BYU Professor of Political Science Richard Davis, stepped down as the Coordinator for our Civic<br />

Engagement Leadership Minor as of May 1, 2020, and then retired quietly from the Department<br />

of Political Science after over 20 years of service, in the Spring of <strong>2021</strong>. We thank Richard for his<br />

excellent work, from heading up the “Futures” committee which generated the idea of greater<br />

involvement in civic engagement, to hosting an annual civic engagement research conference<br />

on campus, hosting a lecture series on various avenues of civic engagement, and promoting civic<br />

engagement through on campus advocacy for things such as voter enrollment, political debates,<br />

etc. He has done a terrific job that deserves our combined gratitude. Thank you, Richard.<br />

Richard received a BA in Political Science from BYU and a PhD in Political Science from Syracuse<br />

University. He has advocated and written about reforms to the selection process to the United States<br />

Supreme Court after what he said is a process that has become more and more political. “I think<br />

those days are gone, when you could just look<br />

at the merits of a nominee and say this person<br />

belongs on the court,” said Richard Davis, a<br />

political science professor at Brigham Young<br />

University. “You have the Democrats portray<br />

the nominee one way, the Republicans another<br />

way, (and) when they get on the court, they<br />

are tagged. They are their person or their<br />

person,” he added.<br />

ISSUE<br />

31<br />


17<br />

Davis has advocated reforms to the court,<br />

beginning with term limits for the nine<br />

justices, which would allow for an automatic<br />

replacement every two years.<br />

“If we had an 18-year term limit for justices,<br />

then we would know when they are going to<br />

leave the court, and there wouldn’t be this<br />

concern about, when is the next time we are going to have a nomination,” he said. Davis also said<br />

the country needs a bipartisan nominating commission, focused on finding impartial jurists. Davis<br />

believes both parties need to act to keep politics from overtaking the highest court in the land.<br />

Dr. Davis also founded the United Utah Party in 2017, and served as Chairperson until 2020. In 2016,<br />

a small group of people in Utah began talking about the possibility of forming a new party. We<br />

held several meetings in early 2017 in various parts of the state to involve more and more people.<br />

Eventually, we formed a political action committee and then, in late spring of 2017, filed to become a<br />

political party. The past four years have been quite a ride. We have gone from nothing to a political<br />

party with thousands of registered members and even more supporters who vote for our candidates.<br />

In <strong>2021</strong>, the United Utah Party has eighteen candidates running for the Utah State Legislature,<br />

which is the largest slate of candidates of any party other than the Democrats or Republicans. The<br />

UUP candidates have drafted a statement that explains their legislative priorities as a caucus for the<br />

<strong>2021</strong> legislative session. Davis notes that the UUP offers voters an opportunity to choose a candidate<br />

without partisan baggage.<br />

Thank you for your years of service, Richard!<br />




Christopher Krewson<br />

Christopher Krewson is an Assistant Professor in the<br />

Political Science Department at Brigham Young University.<br />

Christopher’s research is based in American politics, with a<br />

focus on judicial politics, political institutions, and political<br />

behavior. His work examines judicial behavior both off and<br />

on the bench, as well as public perceptions of the Court.<br />

Chris grew up in Clovis, California in the Central Valley. In<br />

High School he played volleyball and had a record number<br />

of blocks. After graduation, he went on a mission to Samoa.<br />

Since his mission, his parents moved to Maryland, then to<br />

Chicago, then to Northern Wisconsin. Chris wanted a career<br />

where he could stay for his whole life. He came to BYU and<br />

majored in American Studies with a minor in Statistics.<br />

Perhaps the most influential part of his undergraduate work<br />

was his time on the Washington Seminar where he worked<br />

in the Federal Judicial Center, researching on the court mingled with law students. As a result, he<br />

pursued a PhD in Political Science at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. He is a Bucks fan!<br />

(They just won the NBA championship <strong>2021</strong>.) He met his wife in high school. They started to date at<br />

BYU after he returned home from his mission. They married during his time as an undergraduate<br />

at BYU; they had two children at BYU, one child in Wisconsin, and then their fourth in California<br />

where he worked for two years at the Claremont Graduate University in Claremont, which is located<br />

in southern California near Los Angeles. He has been in the BYU political science department<br />

since 2020, when he was hired during the current pandemic. His parents live in Chippewa <strong>Fall</strong>s,<br />

Wisconsin.<br />

His scholarship focuses on American Politics, especially the<br />

courts, with a focus on the Supreme Court. He believes that term<br />

limits might be one way to de-politicize the courts, with vacancies<br />

occurring at regular intervals. Term limits may lessen the political<br />

stakes associated with any one given vacancy and lead to less<br />

Thank you Dr. Sven Wilson<br />

We wanted to extend a heartfelt thank you to Dr. Sven Wilson, who<br />

has served as Department Chair for the past seven years. We will focus<br />

on his scholarship in a future issue, but wanted to make sure he knows<br />

how much we appreciate his work on behalf of BYU Political Science<br />

and his stabilizing, encouraging presence. Thank you, again.<br />

Ryan Davis Promotion to Associate Professor<br />

Ryan Davis has been promoted to Associate Professor! He also<br />

received the Martin B. Hickman Excellence in Teaching Award from<br />

the College of Family, Home and Social Sciences this past August.<br />

Congratulations Ryan!<br />

17<br />

18<br />

Ryan centers his pedagogy on teaching students how to apply<br />

philosophical thinking to the world around them. One student<br />

summed up the effect of his tutelage by saying that they now “think<br />

of my own arguments, and the arguments of others, in a more<br />

constructive way—as premises leading to a conclusion.” He is best<br />

known for his deep love of the greater sage-grouse and Taylor Swift<br />

lyrics, resulting in students observing that he is “inadvertently hilarious” and “really defies the idea<br />

of a stoic philosophy professor.”

ISSUE<br />

31<br />

19<br />








As of December 1, 2020, Professor Jeremy Pope’s book with<br />

Shawn Treier (Australian National University) is out with the<br />

University of Michigan Press: Founding Factions: How Majorities<br />

Shifted and Aligned to Shape the U.S. Constitution<br />

The fundamental importance of the 1787 Constitutional<br />

Convention continues to affect contemporary politics. The<br />

Constitution defines the structure and limits of the American<br />

system of government, and it organizes contemporary debates<br />

about policy and legal issues—debates that explicitly invoke the<br />

intentions and actions of those delegates to the Convention.<br />

Virtually all scholarship emphasizes the importance of<br />

compromise between key actors or factions at the Convention.<br />

In truth, the deep structure of voting at the Convention remains<br />

somewhat murky because the traditional stories are incomplete.<br />

There were three key factions at the Convention, not two.<br />

The alliance of the core reformers with the slave interests<br />

helped change representation and make a stronger national<br />

government. When it came time to create a strong executive,<br />

a group of small state delegates provided the crucial votes.<br />

Traditional accounts gloss over the complicated coalition politics<br />

that produced these important compromises, while this book<br />

shows the specific voting alignments. It is true that the delegates<br />

came with common purposes, but they were divided by both<br />

interests and ideas into three crosscutting factions. There was<br />

no persistent dominant coalition of reformers or nationalists;<br />

rather, there was a series of minority factions allying with<br />

one another on the major issues to fashion the compromise.<br />

Founding Factions helps us understand the nature of shifting<br />

majorities and how they created the American government.<br />




The Importance of Message, Messenger, Medium, and Structure.<br />

Cambridge University Press. While much is known about<br />

who votes in American elections, much less is known about<br />

who donates. In this book, the authors utilize a unique and<br />

historically unprecedented data set of donors from the 2008 and<br />

2012 presidential elections to answer longstanding questions:<br />

what is the relationship between donors and candidates? How<br />

do candidates attract and respond to contributors? How do<br />

campaign strategies reflect changing campaign finance laws and<br />

the development of the internet?<br />

19<br />

20<br />

With unprecedented cooperation from the Obama, McCain,<br />

and Romney campaigns, the authors investigate presidential

campaign donors at all giving levels to produce the most<br />

systematic and complete analysis of donors to presidential<br />

nominees to date. As elections are decided increasingly by<br />

donors' dollars, Who Donates to Campaigns? provides relevant<br />

research on the broader trends in partisan polarization and,<br />

more generally, on how campaigns can engage more citizens in<br />

political participation.<br />



Richard Davis wrote Supreme Democracy. In the nineteenth and<br />

early twentieth centuries, Supreme Court nominations were<br />

driven by presidents, senators, and some legal community<br />

elites. Many nominations were quick processes with little Senate<br />

deliberation, minimal publicity and almost no public involvement.<br />

Today, however, confirmation takes 81 days on average-Justice<br />

Antonin Scalia's former seat has already taken much longer to filland<br />

it is typically a media spectacle. How did the Supreme Court<br />

nomination process become so public and so nakedly political?<br />

What forces led to the current high-stakes status of the process?<br />

How could we implement reforms to improve the process?<br />

ISSUE<br />

31<br />


21<br />

In Supreme Democracy: The End of Elitism in the Supreme Court<br />

Nominations, Richard Davis, an eminent scholar of American<br />

politics and the courts, traces the history of nominations from the<br />

early republic to the present. He examines the component parts of<br />

the nomination process one by one: the presidential nomination<br />

stage, the confirmation management process, the role of the<br />

Senate Judiciary Committee, and the increasing involvement<br />

over time of interest groups, the news media, and public opinion.<br />

The most dramatic development, however, has been the<br />

democratization of politics. Davis delves into the constitutional<br />

underpinnings of the nomination process and its traditional<br />

form before describing a more democratic process that has<br />

emerged in the past half century. He details the struggle<br />

overimage-making between supporters and opponents<br />

intended to influence the news media and public opinion. Most<br />

importantly, he provides a thorough examination of whether or<br />

not increasing democracy always produces better governance,<br />

and a better Court. Not only an authoritative analysis of<br />

theSupreme Court nomination process from the founding era<br />

to the present, Supreme Democracy will be an essential guide to<br />

all of the protracted nomination battles yet to come.<br />




BYU Professor Kendall Stiles, and Professor Kurt Mills edited<br />

Understanding Global Cooperation. This work is a collection of<br />

twenty-five articles previously published in Global Governance<br />

- one from each year of the journals existence highlighting<br />

some of the best work published in the journal, along with an<br />

Introduction by the two editors.<br />






Professor Wade Jacoby, who passed away on February 29, 2020, has<br />

recently receive a posthumous honor. The Chair of the European<br />

Union Studies Association (EUSA), Sara Wallace Goodman,<br />

announced in July of <strong>2021</strong> that the organization voted to rename<br />

EUSA's prize for Best Dissertation the “Wade Jacoby Prize.”<br />

The European Union Studies Association (EUSA) is the premier<br />

scholarly and professional association focusing on the European<br />

Union, the ongoing integration process, and transatlantic relations.<br />

Founded in 1988, EUSA now has over 600 members throughout North America, all EU member<br />

states, and on all continents, representing the social sciences, the humanities, business and law<br />

practitioners, news media, and governments on both sides of the Atlantic.<br />

The EUSA Prize for Best Dissertation in EU studies is awarded to a dissertation written in English<br />

on any aspect of European integration submitted in completion of the Ph.D. at any university in the<br />

two academic years preceding an upcoming EUSA Conference.<br />

Wade loved working with graduate students, and EUSA Executives believe this prize really honors<br />

his spirit and memory. We miss you Wade!<br />

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2ND, 2020<br />


What do the Hunger Games, Hamtaro (a famous Japanese cartoon),<br />

and Harry Potter have in common? All have been referenced in<br />

recent Thai protests. For the past three months, tens of thousands<br />

of people have been protesting across Thailand. The protesters are<br />

mostly students, but their demands are much more serious than<br />

their symbols of teen pop culture might suggest. Their original set<br />

of demands included three core reforms: dissolving the House of<br />

Representatives, a military-dominated body which came to power<br />

in sham elections in 2019; drafting a new constitution, a military-drafted charter was introduced<br />

in 2017; and ending intimidation of the people, such as by arresting protest leaders and issuing<br />

emergency decrees. They have since broached the once-taboo topic of monarchical reform,<br />

demanding that the king be subject to the constitution and stay out of politics.<br />

21<br />

22<br />

The scope of these protests, both in the boldness of their demands as well as the breadth of their<br />

support, makes them different than the polarized mass protests of the past two decades that saw<br />

opposing red and yellow shirts throng the streets. Rather, the 2020 protests look more similar to<br />

those in 1973, 1976, and 1992 — protests that continued a battle over Thai nationalism that began<br />

in 1932. In an open letter to the government published in the Thai Enquirer, one young protester<br />

captured the spirit of this battle: “You tell us we should love our country, religion, and monarchy.<br />

We have very different ideas about what this means. The country is not its government. The<br />

country is its people. And I love my country, but I will love it on my own terms … Not because a

power tells us what to think and who to love under fear of death and imprisonment.<br />

”<br />

See link: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/11/02/thailands-nationalmoment-protests-in-a-continuing-battle-over-nationalism/<br />

ISSUE<br />

31<br />


23<br />

MONDAY, AUGUST 2, <strong>2021</strong><br />


On Monday, August 2, <strong>2021</strong>, it was announced that Quinn Mecham has been named associate<br />

director for research and academic programs at the Kennedy<br />

Center, effective January 2022. Mecham replaces Stan Benfell, who<br />

was recently named director of the Kennedy Center after Renata<br />

Forste's appointment as international vice president of BYU.<br />

Mecham is currently the coordinator of the Middle East Studies/<br />

Arabic program at the Kennedy Center. He has taught in the<br />

Political Science department at BYU since 2013 and has also been<br />

an Academy Scholar at Harvard University, a visiting scholar at<br />

George Washington University, a professor at Middlebury College,<br />

and a member of the Policy Planning Staff of the U.S. Department<br />

of State focusing on the Arab Gulf, political Islam, and global<br />

religious affairs. He earned his PhD in Political Science from<br />

Stanford after studying at BYU.<br />

Quinn is also running for City Council in Orem, Utah this summer and fall of <strong>2021</strong>. We wish Quinn<br />

best of luck in his desire to serve in the public sector, in addition to his work at BYU.<br />

SATURDAY, MAY 1, 2020<br />



Quin Monson from Political Science has agreed to assume<br />

the leadership role for Civic Engagement beginning May 1,<br />

2020, from Professor Richard Davis. Quin has considerable<br />

experience working with both political candidates and<br />

governmental and non-governmental agencies and will add a<br />

new perspective to this program. We look forward to seeing<br />

the program under his leadership.<br />




TUESDAY, APRIL 13TH, <strong>2021</strong><br />


Wealthier nations in Europe and North America have snatched up the majority of COVID-19 vaccine<br />

doses manufactured globally, while some low-and-middle-income countries around the world have<br />

yet to administer a single dose of the vaccine. This is the vaccine inequality that the World Health<br />

Organization has been warning against for the last year. Quinn Mecham is a professor of political<br />

science at Brigham Young University. Listen here: https://tinyurl.com/2cc3yw38<br />

SATURDAY, MAY 5TH, <strong>2021</strong><br />


President Joe Biden’s plans to invest in infrastructure, create jobs, and strengthen the safety net for<br />

American families have drawn comparisons to the sweeping agendas of two previous Democratic<br />

presidents. But Republicans in Congress dismiss the president's plans as an expensive, big-government<br />

approach. Grant Madsen and Christ Karpowitz help to put Biden's plans into perspective.<br />

Madsen is a historian and professor at Brigham Young University, and Karpowitz is a professor of<br />

political science and co-director of the Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy at BYU.<br />

Listen to it here: https://tinyurl.com/yhnxzsee<br />

FRIDAY, JUNE 17TH, <strong>2021</strong><br />


President Joe Biden just met for his first summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Putin<br />

called the meeting “construction”; Biden said he was looking to establish a “stable, predictable<br />

relationship.” Historian Grant Madsen and political scientist Chris Karpowitz, both professors at<br />

Brigham Young University, analyze the summit. Here’s the link: https://tinyurl.com/byuradio<br />

TUESDAY, JULY 28TH, <strong>2021</strong><br />


A timely segment on Tunsia with Quinn Mecham. Tunisia was the only country to transition to<br />

democracy as a result of the 2011 Arab uprising. A dangerous power grab has now thrown that<br />

democracy into doubt and chaos—and some citizens are actually welcoming the shift toward<br />

authoritarian rule. Quinn Mecham, a professor of political science at Brigham Young University and<br />

regular guest on Top of Mind, examines the situation.<br />

Listen to it here: https://tinyurl.com/uwkfj378<br />

23<br />


(continued from page 4)<br />

other governments behave within their dependence network and alter their own actions to be<br />

more consistent with those of their partners. Leaders value approval from network partners. A<br />

dependence network is a set of partners states with whom it regularly engages in exchanges of<br />

valued goods. And the article suggests that they expect states to engage in “diffuse reciprocity”<br />

with their network partners where they reasonably expect some return for their behavior.<br />

On June 1, 1998, states convened in Rome to finalize the ICC Statute. And, in the end, supporters<br />

decided they had the votes to push through a very strong Court. The central insight of this article<br />

is that actors consider the likely reactions of their network partners when making enforcement<br />

decisions. This is why states agreed to a strong ICC. If the government in question depends on<br />

countries that have committed to a strong ICC, leaders will likely conclude that their partners<br />

will react positively to those who also commit to punish human rights violations.<br />

ISSUE<br />

31<br />


25<br />

Thus, for any particular government, the larger the proportion of its network partners<br />

that strongly supported the ICC, the stronger the pressure of committing to the ICC as an<br />

enforcement mechanism, and the greater the likelihood that the government would commit.<br />

Dependence matters because states can impose rewards and punishments, either material or<br />

social, on others.<br />

The central refinement of this article over most of the scholarly work on interdependence, is to<br />

conceptualize dependence as existing within a network.<br />

Dr. Goodliffe and Dr. Hawkins’ most striking conclusion is that even in the face of these<br />

numerous control variables, trade networks still mattered and in fact exerted as large of a<br />

substantive influence as the better-known and more widely discussed factors. The evidence for<br />

trade networks is remarkably robust, surviving multiple models where other variables failed,<br />

suggesting that state positions on the ICC were influenced by their trade partners. (Jay Goodliffe<br />

& Darren Hawkins (2009).)<br />

Thank you, Dr. Goodliffe and Dr. Hawkins for a fascinating article.<br />




BY<br />


Professor Emeritus, BYU Political Science<br />

This morning I want to read and comment on a few of the themes found in this sacred<br />

“declaration of belief regarding governments and laws” that we know as section 134 of<br />

the Doctrine and Covenants. The teachings contained therein make clear what must<br />

be rendered to Caesar and what must be rendered to God. Verse 1 begins, “We believe<br />

that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man.” What a simple, yet<br />

bold, opening to this declaration. Keep in mind that this declaration was adopted by the<br />

Church “after the mobbings, the plunderings, [and] the assassinations” that were a part<br />

of the Church’s early experience in Missouri. This statement was written by “a people,<br />

who, judged by human standards, had every reason to feel that their government<br />

had failed, and that they might not hopefully and successfully look thereto for their<br />

protection” (J. Reuben Clark, Jr. CR, April 1935, p. 90). This opening declaration lays<br />

to rest the deceit of both ancient and modern anarchists that government is evil . . .<br />

Why would the Lord institute government among his children when government has<br />

the potential of becoming dictatorial and of limiting human freedom? This question<br />

is answered in verse 6 of this section: “As without [government and its laws] peace and<br />

harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror.”<br />

26<br />

25<br />

“Stan Taylor, “Accountable Citizenship,”<br />

devotional address given on 5 May, 1998,<br />

see speeches.byu.edu.

ISSUE<br />

31<br />

27<br />



Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!