2007 Conference Program - Midwest Political Science Association

39-301 POSTER SESSION: LEGISLATIVE POLITICS:
INSTITUTIONS
Room Exhibit Hall, 4 th Floor, Fri at 12:45 pm
Presenter Abstention and Absence in Parliamentary Voting
(Board 1)
Martin Ejnar Hansen, University of Aarhus
Overview: Using both quantitative and qualitative data from
Ireland and Denmark I analyze the use of abstention and absence
in parliaments. I find and explain that in both cases some
legislators are more likely to abstain or be absent than others.
Poster Rules, Organizations, Institutions, and Legislative
Development
(Board 2)
Jesus S. Peralta, University of West Georgia
Overview: In the legislative literature, rules, organizations, and
institutions are confounded. I argue that the failure to recognize
theoretical differences between these concepts limits our
understanding of how legislatures develop.
40-301 POSTER SESSION: CANDIDATES, INSTITUTIONS,
AND OUTCOMES IN LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS
Room Exhibit Hall, 4 th Floor, Fri at 12:45 pm
Presenter Candidates and Voter Turnout in Congressional Elections
(Board 3)
Nathan A. Ilderton, Texas A&M University
Overview: This paper examines voter turnout in congressional
elections. It tests whether or not the quality of challengers in U.S.
House elections enhances voter turnout.
Presenter Modernization and the Politics of Survival in the Middle East
(Board 4)
Caroleen Marji Sayej, Long Island University
Overview: This paper examines the claim that modernization in
the Middle East lags behind other regions. Regimes in the Middle
East not only embrace, but also survive expressly because they
follow the Western model.
Presenter Variation of Votes, a Variation of Representational Style?
(Board 5)
Peter W. Brusoe, American University
Overview: Senators face numerous constraints on how they
represent their states, including their relationship with the other
senator, and areas of expertise. This paper attempts to add to this
discussion by examining how electoral support may vary the
representation.
Presenter Party or Personality in the Present: Reassessing Senate
Election Outcomes
(Board 6)
Brendan P. Toner, Southern Illinois University
Joshua L. Mitchell, Southern Illinois University
Overview: This work is an extension of Abramowitz’s work on
Senate election outcomes. The main finding from our work is
candidate characteristics outweigh state characteristics in
incumbent races. However, in open seats state characteristics
matter more.
Disc. Cynthia R. Rugeley, Florida State University
41-6 INTEREST GROUPS, LITIGATION, AND
ATTORNEY EXPERTISE
Room Parlor H, 6 th Floor, Fri at 12:45 pm
Chair Eric N. Waltenburg, Purdue University
Paper Who is Demanding Litigation? A Roll Call Analysis
Sean Farhang, University of California, Berkeley
Miguel de Figueiredo, University of California, Berkeley
Overview: We analyze congressional roll call votes from 1887 to
2005 on legislative provisions encouraging or discouraging private
litigation in federal policy implementation.
Paper Does Advocacy Matter? The Impact of Attorney Expertise in
Federal Courts
Rachael K. Hinkle, University of Toledo
Overview: This paper examines the relationship between attorney
expertise and case outcomes in the United States Courts of
Appeals and concludes that there is no such relationship at any
significant level.
Page | 166
Paper The Impact of Amicus Briefs on Supreme Court Justices and
Their Opinions
Timothy G. Howard, North Harris College
Overview: This paper looks at data accumulated on Supreme
Court decisions over a period of approximately 60 years and
analyzes which amicus filers have the greatest impact on Supreme
Court decisions, and on the votes of individual justices.
Paper Amicus Curiae at Oral Argument: How the Court Uses its
Information Sources
Matthew M. C. Roberts, Calvin College
Overview: This paper builds off of recent research about the
impact that oral arguments have on the Court's decision making—
in particular, how the Court treats amicus curiae that are allowed
to participate at oral arguments.
Paper The Supreme Court and Participant Strategies for Framing
Issues
Justin Wedeking, University of Minnesota
Overview: I investigate how petitioners, respondents, and amici
frame important issues before the Supreme Court.
Disc. Eric N. Waltenburg, Purdue University
James C. Brent, San Jose State University
41-19 INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF COURTS FROM A
COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE: LEGITIMACY,
INDEPENDENCE, AND AUTHORITY
Room Burnham 1, 7 th Floor, Fri at 12:45 pm
Chair Shannon I. Smithey, Westminster College
Paper Formation vs. Action: What Empowers Constitutional
Courts?
Sabrina L. Pinnell, University of California, Santa Barbara
Overview: This paper concentrates on constitutional courts of
three countries (Hungary, South Africa, and the Russian
Federation) to explore what establishes court legitimacy and
authority: their initial formation, or actions of courts after
formation.
Paper The Politics of Supreme Court Reform in Argentina: In
Search for Legitimacy
Alba M. Ruibal, Instituto de Investigaciones Juridicas, UNAM
Overview: The paper argues that the reforms related to the
independence of the supreme court promoted in Argentina in 2003
can be explained as a movement of governmental self-restriction,
in order to build legitimacy in a context of institutional crisis
Paper Determinants of Judicial Institutionalization
Kirill M. Bumn, University of Kentucky
Overview: Our paper evaluates several explanations for judicial
institutional growth, focusing on the regional and domestic
political influences on the development of post-communist
constitutional courts.
Paper (De)Juridicialization and American Politics
Sarah Staszak, Brandeis University
Overview: This paper examines de-juridicialization-- efforts to
roll back the court's role as implementer of administrative law-- by
examining relevant mechanisms across a range of policy areas and
court doctrine in order to assess what accounts for durability.
Paper Instability of Argentine Justices in Office: A Critical
Appraisal
Maria Andrea Castagnola, University of Pittsburgh
Overview: Why do argentine justices remain a short time in
office?In this paper I argue that it is the political power of the
president and the electoral executive-cycle, rather than the
justice’s own voting behavior, what determines the durability of
justices
Disc. Richard L. Vining, Emory University
Shannon I. Smithey, Westminster College