Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Population mixing can have dramatic health effects, as seen with the Spanish introduction of smallpox to New World inhabitants. Health effects can also be subtle, especially given the long latency of some diseases (e.g., cancers). In this paper we investigate how socioeconomic factors and population mixing relate to the relative health of populations at the county level. Assessment of the stable population is necessary to correctly determine the �at-risk� population for either the incidence or prevalence of morbidity/mortality within a population. Further, understanding population migration flows can reveal the role that place versus the population (or community) play in morbidity and mortality outcomes. We categorize the dataset by non-metro versus metro and, separately, healthy (low mortality) versus unhealthy (high mortality) counties. Using all-causes-of-mortality as the health outcome and socioeconomic factors as controls, we test the importance of county-level population stability, in-migration and out-migration. Both in- and out-migration rates are negatively associated with mortality rates except in unhealthy places, while population stability (non-movers) is positively associated with mortality rates no matter how counties are grouped. This finding supports previous research from other countries, indicating that healthy people move from unhealthy places while unhealthy people remain in unhealthy places, as well as supporting parallel research in the migration patterns of the poor, where migration is found to maintain and reinforce spatial concentrations of poverty. We conclude that population stability reinforces ill-health status of county populations while in- and out-migration is correlated with improving county-level health status.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Democratization has become a standard part of post-war nationbuilding, whether attempted by international organizations in places such as Sierra Leone, Angola, and Timor-Leste, or by individual states and coalitions such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. The democratization process requires, and is highlighted by, the holding of elections. Indeed, the UN boasts that its peacekeepers have “enabled people in more than 45 countries to participate in free and fair elections” following wars. Moreover, elections are a visible sign of stabilization, a sign that peacekeeping and nationbuilding are working. Yet, do such elections contribute to peace? They do give the populace a stake in the government, a factor arguably necessary for peace’s postwar (or counterinsurgents’ wartime) success, and heighten the likelihood of good governance as the government is accountable to the population. However, in some cases, as in Angola, elections have been the catalyst for a return to war. In others, such as Iraq, they reflect ethnic and religious differences as candidates use those divisions to rally support. This paper examines the role of elections in post-war reconstruction efforts. It bridges a methodological divide, combining statistical analysis with case studies. All internal wars ending between 1990 and 2004 are examined, with analysis focused on the effects of the timing of elections on the postwar degree of peace. Three case studies, including Afghanistan and Angola, are also looked at with an eye to understanding the mechanisms through which elections enhanced affected the likelihood of peace.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: What previously seemed highly unlikely because of the existing notions of women as victims of war rather than as perpetrators, women are taking a leading role in terrorism by using their bodies as human detonators for the explosive material strapped around their bodies. To complicate the notions of femininity and motherhood, the Improvised Explosive Device (IED) is often disguised under the women's clothing to make her appear as if she is pregnant and thus beyond suspicion or reproach. The advent of women suicide bombers has transformed the revolutionary womb into an exploding one. In the case studies of Sri Lanka and Chechnya, women have risen to the forefront of their organizations by engaging in suicide terrorism. Complicating matters, many of the women who have joined the Black Widows in Chechnya or the Birds of Paradise Unit of the LTTE are themselves victims of rape from the previous iteration of conflict. Thus they express their outrage against the brutal state by becoming martyrs for their organizations' cause. This paper examines the unintended consequences of rape in war and the increasing role played by women as suicide terrorists. It debates the costs and benefits of women's participation in terrorist organizations by using primary source and interview data collected by the author in Sri Lanka when she was a guest of the LTTE in Kilinochi and the Vanni (Rebel controlled territory).

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: As public support for the war in Iraq waned over time, the Bush administration consciously altered the frames associated with the U.S. military intervention there. In order to mitigate the impact of increasing U.S. casualty figures, President Bush emphasized the inherent brutality of counterinsurgency warfare and described American and allied losses as worthy �sacrifices� in the �defense of freedom.� As public disenchantment increased and critics called for withdrawal timetables, the administration described its opponents as �defeatists� and argued that a retreat from Iraq would mean that several thousand U.S. troops had died �in vain�. The rhetoric of �sunk costs� that must be redeemed through further conflict is a well-known, yet irrational, trope. The casualties-as-sunk-costs frame is believed to be particularly persuasive, given the raw emotions associated with combat losses. This paper builds on past framing research to probe the impact of sunk-cost frames on public willingness to expend additional �blood and treasure� in an ongoing war. The efficacy of these frames was explored through an experiment embedded in a nationally representative survey on attitudes about Iraq. The results reveal the limits of framing effects and the importance of modeling multiple �publics� that respond to (sunk-cost) framing in a differential manner.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The �right to die� has been part of our national lexicon for only three decades, but in that time we have seen a dramatic shift of public opinion toward high, stable supermajority support for the right to die that often crosses partisan and ideological lines. This paper addresses two related questions: has media coverage of court cases or personalities such as Jack Kevorkian and Terri Schiavo driven these macro-level changes, and what determines whether individuals support the �right to die?�
We find that notable court cases have had little impact on public opinion, and that media coverage of public figures has had inconsistent effects. Rather, the framing of the issue has had much more of an impact than the particular facts of the matter. Public opinion is much more supportive of �soft� questions that avoid the term �suicide,� and as the debate gets framed around �suicide,� support drops. While support in for the �right to die� is higher in the aggregate than when previous scholars have written, that rise in support has been across the board. We also find that the �right to die� is part of a constellation of life and death issues, including abortion and the death penalty. A person�s support for assisted suicide is highly correlated with their support for abortion and the death penalty.