Search

Begin New Search Topic Domestic Politics Political Geography North America

21. Analyzing the 2024 Presidential Vote: PRRI’s Post-Election Survey

Author:
PRRI Staff
Publication Date:
12-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
PRRI: Public Religion Research Institute
Abstract:
A new PRRI survey of 4,757 voters explores the U.S. political and cultural landscape after the 2024 election, including the impact of partisanship, race, and religion on voters’ choices and their feelings about the election’s outcome. Additionally, the survey considers how Christian nationalism and authoritarianism are linked to presidential vote choice. In the wake of the election results, the survey also considers Americans’ confidence in our elections, views about our political parties, and attitudes about the state of democracy in a second Trump term.
Topic:
Elections, Domestic Politics, Survey, and Christian Nationalism
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

22. Muslim Contributions to American Prosperity with Dalia Mogahed (Episode 9)

Author:
Sahar Aziz and Dalia Mogahed
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
Abstract:
Muslims have long been central in America’s political discourse, policy debates and popular culture. Yet most Americans say they don’t even know a Muslim and more than 80% of media coverage of Islam and Muslims in the United States is negative. This week’s episode discusses the myriad ways in which Muslims contribute to economic development, medicine, philanthropy, arts, entertainment, sports, and education in the United States. Host Sahar Aziz (https://saharazizlaw.com/) addresses these issues with scholar Dalia Mogahed (https://www.ispu.org/scholars/daliamo...) .
Topic:
Domestic Politics, Islamophobia, Economic Development, and Muslims
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

23. Foreign influence in US politics

Author:
Marco Grotteria, Max Miller, and S. Lakshmi Naaraayanan
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Nottingham Interdisciplinary Centre for Economic and Political Research (NICEP)
Abstract:
This paper documents that foreign lobbying influences US government spending. We introduce a comprehensive dataset of over 230,000 date-stamped, in-person meetings between agents representing foreign governments and individual US legislators, state governors, and employees of US executive agencies from 2000 to 2018. The data suggest that foreign agents meet disproportionately with individuals important for foreign aid and corporate subsidies, like legislators sitting on powerful congressional committees. Foreign agents also maintain connections with legislators even after they depart powerful committees, providing evidence that meetings do not just reflect short-term quid-pro-quo arrangements. Around meetings, foreign countries receive greater amounts of financial aid. Foreign firms whose governments lobby more often also receive larger corporate subsidies from areas the legislators and governors that they meet with represent. Finally, legislators who meet more often with foreign agents receive both monetary and electoral benefits, while we do not find changes in the political contributions they receive or in their probability of re-election, suggesting that legislators are not punished by their constituents for meeting with representatives of foreign countries.
Topic:
Domestic Politics, Lobbying, and Foreign Influence
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

24. Stress-Testing State Power: When Governors and Presidents Diverge on Matters of National Security

Author:
Carrie Cordero
Publication Date:
12-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
As the end of the first quarter of the 21st century approaches, the United States’ unique federalist system of government is increasingly relevant as it relates to national security and foreign affairs. The activities of federal, state, and local governments are increasingly intertwined with national security issues, which in modern history have been reserved for federal government leadership and responsibility. This trend is observable through the assertion of existing legal authorities by governors, legislative action taken by state legislators, and litigation driven by state attorneys general. There are two main ways that states are increasingly engaging in issues touching national security or foreign affairs. The first is by taking action that does or could potentially impact U.S. national security. This includes actions such as litigating against federal government border security and immigration policy implementation, more assertively exercising National Guard authorities to effectuate homeland security policies or conduct law enforcement activities, or engaging in international trade directly with foreign countries, for example during a global pandemic.1 A second method is by taking action in response to an actual or perceived national security threat. This includes actions such as banning state government employees’ access to TikTok, strengthening election security based on threats as reported by the intelligence community (IC), or limiting foreign investment in a state based on national security concerns.2 In short, the interplay between states and the federal government as it relates to national security is undergoing a shift. As Columbia law professor Matthew Waxman has observed, “The federalist macrostructure of our national security system has changed dramatically during the course of our history, and it will continue to evolve.”3 This trend of increasing federalism contrasts with developments during the second half of the 20th century through the early 21st century, a period characterized by tremendous growth in the federal government’s national security enterprise. Milestones from that era include the 1947 National Security Act, which established the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the accompanying growth of the military and intelligence community enterprise. The post-9/11 era saw additional development, growth, and maturation of federal institutions engaged in national security. This era ushered in a new body of federal law and associated institutions created by those laws. These include the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which concentrated the operations and activities of 22 agencies into one. It also led to the creation of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), which provides strategic direction, policy development, and management oversight to the other 17 elements of the intelligence community. Meanwhile, throughout this period, the courts afforded substantial deference to the federal government on national security issues and legal authorities.4 The activities of federal, state, and local governments are increasingly intertwined with national security issues, which in modern history have been reserved for federal government leadership and responsibility. This year, the Securing U.S. Democracy Initiative at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) began analyzing the impact of increasing federalism on national security with the aim of developing recommendations that address certain practical aspects of this trend. Although there are a variety of areas where potential tensions lie at the intersection of state action and national security policymaking, this initial research report from the first year of work focuses on two specific aspects: (1) the assertion of National Guard authorities in a domestic protest scenario, and (2) the potential impact of a social media ban related to foreign malign influence on elections. A common thread through both subject areas includes a current and evolving national security threat of malign foreign influence. To examine these issues, the CNAS Securing U.S. Democracy Initiative developed and ran two scenario exercises in May 2024 to explore how a clash of legal authorities between the federal government and state governments might play out.5 Participants in the scenario exercises included former senior government officials who previously held roles such as agency heads and general counsels, a former member of Congress, former congressional chief counsels, former senior National Guard leadership and operational-level Guard personnel, a state-level former deputy secretary of state, and national and homeland security experts and practitioners. Many of the participants have held more than one professional position relevant to the issues explored in the exercises. The participants were charged with examining fictional scenarios set in October 2024, one month before the U.S. presidential election. The scenarios roughly assumed the real-world American political landscape as it existed in May 2024, which at that time included a president who was also the presumptive Democratic nominee seeking reelection in November. The governors represented in each exercise matched the political party governing that state in the real world. Accordingly, the Texas governor in Scenario 1 is a Republican; the California governor in Scenario 2 is a Democrat. This report provides background and analysis on potential tensions that can emerge between state action and national security decision-making in the context of two separate scenario exercises. The goal of the exercises was to better understand the dynamics and decision-making that might occur when state and federal officials disagree about a matter of national security.6 Participants were advised to consider constitutional, legal, and policy factors relevant to each scenario, and to make decisions based on the role to which they were assigned. This report summarizes these tailored exercises and provides insights that emerged from them. The report then provides policy recommendations intended to mitigate the tensions that the exercises suggest can arise when federal and state authorities diverge on issues of national security that were the subject of the scenarios.
Topic:
Government, National Security, Domestic Politics, Federalism, and State Power
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

25. Brace yourself: How the 2024 US presidential election could affect Europe

Author:
Célia Belin, Majda Ruge, and Jeremy Shapiro
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
A profound debate is taking place among US political parties about America’s future foreign policy orientation. Democrats and Republicans are aligned on some issues, such as the strategic rivalry with China, protecting domestic manufacturing, and access to strategic technologies. But the parties also disagree on subjects of crucial importance to Europeans such as climate action, the war in Ukraine, and the United States’ relationship with its allies. Within both the Democratic and Republican parties, three tribes exert influence over party foreign policy and will shape the stance of future administrations. On America’s global posture and military presence abroad, the parties are split between those who believe in limited international US engagement, others who argue for prioritising the Indo-Pacific, and advocates of continued US global leadership or even primacy. Europeans must not simply hope they can accommodate potentially dramatic shifts in US policy in the coming years, but should instead take steps now to enhance and protect their own position in the world.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Elections, Domestic Politics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

26. International Impact of American Politics

Author:
Victor H. Ashe
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Ambassadors Review
Institution:
Council of American Ambassadors
Abstract:
The divisiveness of American politics has always been around at some level since World War II, but it seems to have reached new heights in 2022. Among negative consequences, some candidates whose qualifications seem hard to discern were elected. However, we live in a democracy, and voters are entitled to their views even if they may be mistaken. Robust debate is vital, but in many cases candidates from both American political parties have refused to appear together to debate. This is especially unfortunate in my view as voters should be able to see and hear opposing candidates debate each other. The presidential candidates in both Brazil and France appeared together in 2022. Yet it is not clear that 2024 will see our two major party nominees sharing the same stage to debate. Even on a local level where I live in Knoxville, Tennessee, several Republican candidates from local to federal levels simply declined to debate their Democratic opponents or respond to questions. Several of those GOP nominees were articulate and could have held their own but opted not to showcase themselves. Such an attitude is wrong in my view and totally driven by narrow partisan political considerations. It deprives voters of a first-hand view of the opposing candidates.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, History, Democracy, and Domestic Politics
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

27. Puerto Rico’s New Leftist Alliance Poses a Threat to US Imperialism

Author:
Jenaro Abraham
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA)
Abstract:
The Puerto Rican Independence Party’s (PIP) latest assembly marks a turning point in electoral strategy and a challenge to the colonial paradigms that have long held the archipelago hostage.
Topic:
Imperialism, Elections, Domestic Politics, Colonialism, and Leftist Politics
Political Geography:
Caribbean, North America, United States of America, and Puerto Rico

28. The increase in partisan segregation in the United States

Author:
Jacob R. Brown, Enrico Cantoni, Ryan D. Enos, Vincent Pons, and Emilie Sartre
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Nottingham Interdisciplinary Centre for Economic and Political Research (NICEP)
Abstract:
This paper provides novel evidence on trends in geographic partisan segregation. Using two individual-level panel datasets covering the near universe of the U.S. population between 2008 and 2020, we leverage information on individuals’ party affiliation to construct two key indicators: i) the fraction of Democrats among voters affiliated with either major party, which reveals that partisan segregation has increased across geographical units, at the tract, county, and congressional district levels; ii) The dissimilarity index, which measures differences in the partisan mix across distinct sub-units and highlights that partisan segregation has also increased within geographical units. Tracking individuals across election years, we decompose changes in partisan segregation into different sources: voter migration, generational change, older voters entering the electorate, and voters changing their partisanship or their registration status. The rise in partisan segregation is mostly driven by generational change, in Democratic-leaning areas, and by the increasing ideological conformity of stayers, in Republican-leaning areas.
Topic:
Domestic Politics, Ideology, Polarization, Partisanship, and Voting Behavior
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

29. The New Domestic Politics of U.S.-China Relations

Author:
Evan S. Medeiros
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Asia Society
Abstract:
The U.S.-China relationship has come to largely define geopolitics in the 21st century, and the bilateral relationship is today often conceived primarily in terms of geopolitical tensions and great power jockeying on the global stage. However, there is more to U.S.-China strategic competition than the geopolitical level. In particular, the influence of domestic political dynamics in both countries is a widely underappreciated factor driving both U.S. and Chinese foreign policy decision-making, including vis-à-vis each other. What are these shifting domestic forces in both countries that are most influencing the relationship, in what ways, and to what effect? In this groundbreaking new report, The New Domestic Politics of U.S.-China Relations, Asia Society Policy Institute's Center for China Analysis Senior Fellow for Foreign Policy Evan S. Medeiros conducts an in-depth investigation and analysis of these questions. He finds substantial new dynamics at play in both countries that have had an increasingly negative impact on U.S.-China ties. In the United States, Congressional activism, electoral politics, public opinion, and shifting roles for interest groups are all influencing U.S. debates, policymaking, and actions — governmental and nongovernmental alike. In China, centralization of decision-making processes, constraints on formerly key actors, shifting national-level priorities, and other structural political and personnel changes are today directly and indirectly influencing Chinese perceptions, policies, and behaviors toward the United States.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, and Domestic Politics
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

30. Five Strategies to Support U.S. Democracy

Author:
Rachel Kleinfeld
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
American democracy is at a dangerous inflection point. The moment requires a step-change in strategy and support. Without such momentum, the country faces a democratic setback potentially as serious as the ones already occurring in India and Hungary (both now ranked only “partially free” by Freedom House) and the nearly one-hundred-year reversal that occurred following America’s Reconstruction era. Many Americans view this moment with concern, but their worry is measured: America’s system is creaky, but the world’s oldest democracy has strong institutions and will pull through. However, since the end of the Cold War, most democratic failure globally has been caused by elected governments using legal methods, such as gerrymandering and technical rule changes, to derail democracy. Their destructions of their own democracies have been supported by pluralities or majorities of their citizenries, whose polarization leads them to back policies that harm democracy to ensure their side prevails. America is on precisely this path. The age and consolidation of U.S. democracy provides resilience—but Americans should not expect too much from the country’s historical strength. Many of the laws that form institutional guardrails were written poorly in the aftermath of the Civil War, with loopholes that are easily challenged given a lack of precedent. Moreover, the country’s age means that much of what are presumed to be laws and institutions are, in fact, simply norms. These norms are eroding quickly. Other organizations and philanthropists already understand the danger America is in. They are pouring time and money into getting more people to vote, particularly minorities and swing voters, to win back democracy. These efforts are necessary—but not sufficient. America’s democratic decline has accelerated despite record numbers of people, minorities, and swing voters voting. And for those on both sides of the aisle for whom these voting measures are proxies for partisan preferences they believe will save U.S. democracy, democratic decline in many states has accelerated despite Democratic control of both chambers of Congress and the presidency at the national level. The community supporting U.S. democracy needs a better strategy.
Topic:
Democracy, Domestic Politics, and Democratic Backsliding
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America