Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Studies of political ambition suggest politicians carefully weigh their options when deciding to run for higher office. These studies either implicitly or explicitly assume a failed campaign for higher political office will be a political liability when it comes time to turn for re-election to the office holder’s current position, yet there is no literature which proves this is true for failed presidential bids. Political losses are typically factored into ambition analysis as a component of the costs of running for higher office; yet if failed runs at higher office do not impact chances for re-election, they should not be considered costs. In this paper, we examine the effects of a failed presidential bid on the re-election prospects of incumbent U.S. Congress members and challenge the assumption that past political action affects future political fortune.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Entitled “Is Iraq a failed state- if so when did it fail,” this paper will illustrate that Iraq experienced three main periods of its history that questioned its sovereignty. The three periods for the achievement of full sovereignty for Iraq came in question in 1921, 1932 and in 1958. However, 1958 was not the final period. This paper will illustrate three subsequent periods in Iraq’s history. This paper will illustrate three additional periods of Iraq’s sovereignty identified as period four, period five and period six. The fourth period will be all events leading up to January 2003; the fifth period will be March 2003-June 2004; the sixth period will be 2004 to present day Iraq. These three periods will be evaluated under the territorial variable of statehood, a criteria of eight characteristics that will be used to determine the typical crisis of statehood. In the factors, a student of International Relations will determine the overall value of when and if Iraq lost its statehood and by the extent of this research will discover when Iraq failed, failing or is free of failure. It will show to the student that Iraq failed as a state in the post Persian Gulf I era in 1991 and subsequently failed as a state in all three periods of Jan. 2003, March 2003-June 2004 and June 2004-present day Iraq.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper is the result of a research project designed to address two questions: ‘why’ do states collapse and ‘how’ do they collapse? Rather than testing existing theories (largely non existent), this paper suggests a new model. The first issue, the causes of state collapse, has been the focus of in depth research over the recent years. The bulk of the comparative work came through large N studies focussing on long-term structural conditions and often resulting in long shopping lists of indicators. Instead, this research develops a concise set of four core causes (rather than indicators) based on in-depth country research (small n) using ‘soft’ qualitative data (quantitative being often unreliable and constraining the research).
The second issue refers to the processes of state collapse and state building. Charles Ragin’s QCA approach proved particularly efficient at processing qualitative data highlighting the dynamics of process. The research has shown that there is no one size fits all process of failure or recovery. Instead, different pathways exist. It also suggests that some variables carry more weight than others at specific moments in the process. As most current work suggests, the economy is an important factor in both the triggering and the recovery from a crisis situation. However, it plays a relative minimal role towards the end of the process when a state crisis collapses. This explains why current early warning frameworks fail to foresee which weak states will collapse.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: To many it is obvious which schools are failing–those whose students perform poorly on achievement tests. But this method of evaluating schools mixes school (e.g., teachers) and non-school (e.g., home and neighborhood) influences in unknown ways. We introduce a new measure, “impact,” designed to separate school and non-school contributions to learning. Our measure of school “impact” is straightforward – the degree to which schools increase their students’ rates of learning when school is in session versus when it is not. Assessing school “impact” with data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study of 1998-98, we show how conclusions about which schools are failing are altered substantially.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: A growing number of scholars advocate decertification for failed States unwilling or unable to meet basic standards of governance. Using insights from recognition, I argue that decertification would not result in more effective domestic government.