Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Understanding who wins in the courts is an essential component of a full appreciation of "the authoritative allocation of values" in society (Easton 1953). In this paper we examine the relationship between the status of litigants, especially the comparison of repeat player "haves" (RP) to one-shotters (OS) who are usually "have-nots," and their rates of success in top appellate courts in the common law world. Using data from the highest courts of appeals across nine countries we explore winners and losers in a comparative context. The results indicate that there is greater variation in who wins and who loses than party capability theory would suggest. Moreover, the results find that contrary to the assumption among many that the creation of entrenched constitutional protections will be particularly advantageous to the “have nots”, we found that individuals won less frequently and governments won more frequently in cases involving the application of such constitutional “protections.” Somewhat analogously, we discovered that contrary to the basic assumptions of democratic theory, ordinary individuals won less often and businesses won more often in democratic regimes than in authoritarian regimes.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: No abstract available at this time.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Social policies developed last century to meet the risks of old age are inadequate to meet the needs of elderly Americans in the 21st century. Population aging, changes in family forms and employment patterns, and an increasingly diverse nation signal the need for policy innovations addressing health and income security, not only for elderly citizens, but also across the life course. Given current budget deficits and out-of-vogue spending programs, tax mechanisms are increasingly the vehicle of choice to address unmet social welfare needs. With spending programs like Medicare and Social Security under siege, and tax-based programs like EITC increasingly important, understanding the social welfare relationship between tax and spending programs in is of paramount importance. This research describes how the US welfare state taxes and spends to create social welfare winners and losers, using health and income security programs designed to meet the needs of elderly citizens to explore these issues.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Several recent spatial modeling studies incorporate valence issues – e.g., voters’ evaluations of the candidates’ competence, integrity, and charisma – that may give one of the candidates an electoral advantage that is independent of his policy positions. However to date all such models assume that while voters value positive valence characteristics, the candidates themselves do not. Building on empirical research by scholars such as Mondak, Stone, Maisel, and Maestas, we develop a spatial model where the candidates are valence-seeking, i.e. – like the voters – the candidates prefer that the winning candidate possess qualities, such as integrity and competence, which will enhance his job performance. We analyze a spatial model where the candidates value both the valence qualities and the policies of the winning candidate, and we show that the candidates’ optimal strategies typically diverge as the valence differential increases, and in particular that the valence-disadvantaged candidate normally has incentives to become more extreme as the valence advantage of her opponent increases – often in contrast to her incentives under standard policy-seeking models in which candidates do not value valence per se.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This study examines the determinants for winning and losing of the about 100 delegates of the Laeken Convention, which has adopted a draft text to reform the European Union.