Search

Begin New Search Topic Domestic Policy Political Geography United States of America

1. Tailpipe Wars: The Presidential Politics of U.S. Auto Emissions

Author:
Ryan Warsing
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Woodrow Wilson School Journal of Public and International Affairs
Institution:
Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University
Abstract:
Despite growing consensus that climate change is real, manmade, and pernicious, the U.S. Congress has failed to update old laws – to say nothing of passing new ones – that might mitigate the crisis. State governments have attempted to fill the void, with California setting de facto national policy using powers delegated under the 1970 Clean Air Act (CAA). The Trump administration’s 2019 bid to revoke these powers rejects the process of “iterative federalism” and leads one to believe Trump’s agenda is both vindictive in nature and impervious to broad support for environmental regulation. Yet this support (even in electorally pivotal states like Pennsylvania) proves a weak motivating factor next to the needs of vulnerable constituencies, notably autoworkers. Trump’s agenda is rationally set by his need to attract support in states like Michigan where votes are precious and regulatory exposure is high. Long a means for the federal government to enjoy environmental progress at a safe political distance, the “California carve-out” seems to have exhausted its utility with the Trump administration, which deems all environmental regulation anathema to growth and the happiness of its base. Trump’s rationale is best understood using Conditional Pandering Theory (CPT), which predicts that presidents with middling approval numbers are apt to be led by the public as Election Day draws near and policy outcomes can be delayed. In the case of emissions, policy outcomes are immaterial so long as targeted marginal voters deliver the president a second term.
Topic:
Climate Change, Legislation, Pollution, Domestic Policy, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. Effect of “Just Cause” Eviction Ordinances on Eviction in Four California Cities

Author:
Julieta Cuellar
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Woodrow Wilson School Journal of Public and International Affairs
Institution:
Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University
Abstract:
The Eviction Lab’s recently released dataset of evictions in the United States provides rich opportunities for exploring the effect of state and local policies on eviction rates. Just cause eviction ordinances—local laws that outline what constitutes grounds for eviction—have gained traction as a policy solution for addressing the eviction crisis. This paper analyzes the relationship between just cause eviction ordinances and eviction rates and eviction filing rates in four California cities. A difference-in-differences matched case model suggests that there is a statistically significant, large, and negative difference between eviction rates and eviction filing rates before and after the passage of just cause eviction ordinances in the four treatment cities, as compared to the difference in these rates before and after the passage of just cause eviction ordinances in matched control cities. Cities that implemented just cause eviction laws experienced lower eviction, by 0.808 percentage points, and eviction filing rates, by 0.780 percentage points, than those that did not.
Topic:
Law, Domestic Policy, and Eviction
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

3. US Elections - The optimistic worst-case scenario

Author:
Christian Kvorning Lassen
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
Christian Kvorning Lassen, Deputy Director of the EUROPEUM Institute for European Policy, comments on the US presidential election. The US elections will come down to the wire, and will be determined by mail-in votes. While this was fully expected during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was also the worst-case scenario given Trump’s persistent attempts to delegitimize mail-in votes, despite lack of clear evidence of their fraudulence. Much like 2016, the key battleground states are Pennsylvania (20 EC votes), Michigan (16) and Wisconsin (10), with mail-in votes deciding their outcome. As of this writing, Pennsylvania has counted 700.000 out of 2.5 million mail-in votes, of which Biden has won 71.7% of them to Trump’s 21.3%. Michigan has counted 425.000 out of 2.48 million, with Biden winning 65% to Trump’s 33%. Finally, Wisconsin still needs to count 1.3 million mail-in votes. Should the trend of Biden winning 2/3 of all mail-in votes, Biden will be a clear election winner, giving the Biden camp cause for optimism.
Topic:
Elections, Donald Trump, Pandemic, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

4. Without Dallas: John F. Kennedy and the Vietnam War

Author:
Mark White
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
What if the most famous murder in history had not taken place on November 22, 1963? With a life and a presidency ended prematurely by an assassin’s bullets, there has been an understandable impulse on the part of historians to consider what would have happened to Kennedy had he lived beyond Dallas. Equally understandable, historians have commented on this issue so as to bolster their interpretation of Kennedy’s presidency.
Topic:
Elections, Vietnam War, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
Vietnam, North America, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

5. U.S. Foreign Policy for the Middle Class: Perspectives From Ohio

Author:
Salman Ahmed, Karan Bhatia, Wendy Cutler, David Gordon, Jennifer Harris, Edward Hill, Douglas Lute, Daniel M. Price, William Shkurti, Christopher Smart, Fran Stewart, Jake Sullivan, Ashley J. Tellis, and Tom Wyler
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
All U.S. administrations aim to conceive foreign policies that protect and enhance Americans’ safety, prosperity, and way of life. However, views now diverge considerably within and across political party lines about whether the U.S. role abroad is adequately advancing the economic well-being of the middle class at home. Today, even as the U.S. economy is growing and unemployment rates are falling, many households still struggle to sustain a middle-class standard of living. Meanwhile, America’s top earners accrue an increasing share of the nation’s income and wealth, and China and other economic competitors overseas reap increasing benefits from a global economy that U.S. security and leadership help underwrite. Policymakers need to explore ways to make U.S. foreign policy work better for America’s middle class, even if their economic fortunes depend largely on domestic factors and policies. However, before policymakers propose big foreign policy changes, they should first test their assumptions about who the middle class is, what economic problems they face, and how different aspects of U.S. foreign policy can cause or solve them. They need to examine how much issues like trade matter to these households’ economic fortunes relative to other foreign and domestic policies. They should acknowledge the trade-offs arising from policy changes that benefit some communities at the expense of others. And they should reach beyond the foreign policy establishment to hear from those in the nation’s heartland who have critical perspectives to offer, especially state and local officials, economic developers, small business owners, local labor representatives, community leaders, and working families. With these objectives in mind, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace launched a series of state-level case studies to determine whether significant changes to U.S. foreign policy are needed to better advance the economic well-being of America’s middle class. Ohio was chosen for the inaugural study because of its economic and political diversity and its well-known status as a bellwether state. Carnegie partnered with researchers at OSU to conduct the study and convened a bipartisan task force comprised of former senior policymakers to provide strategic guidance and shape the findings. Interviews were conducted in Cleveland, Columbus, Coshocton, Dayton, Lima, and Marion to solicit views in diverse conditions across the state.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Government, National Security, Politics, Class, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Evaluation of Trump’s First 100 Days of Action

Author:
An Gang
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pangoal Institution
Abstract:
April 30th 2017 marks the US President Donald Trump's 100th day in office. In US political tradition, the first one hundred days of a first-term presidency are usually called the “observation period” or “honeymoon period,” during which the new leader in Washington acts with great expectations from the public and a moderate thaw in relations with Congress. The new administration tends to face little resistance, and the media usually avoids jumping to conclusions about its course and capability. Hence, the new president takes full advantage of looser constraints and favorable conditions during this period, attempting to remove as many “legacies” lingering from the previous administration as possible (if the two administrations are from different parties), delivering on the promises made during the election campaign, charting the future for the US and the world as clearly as possible, and laying a foundation for policies and performance in the first term. On November 21st 2016, the third day after he won the presidential election, Trump unveiled plans for his first 100 days in office via video, mainly including proposals related to immigration, trade, defense policy, and the political environment in Washington. Trump pledged to “make America great again,” and beat drums for the doctrine of “America first,” attempting to restructure the US economy, trade, and foreign policies. As he stated, “whether it's producing steel, building cars, or curing disease, I want the next generation of production and innovation to happen right here, in our great homeland: America—creating wealth and jobs for American workers.” As we head into the 100th day of the Trump’s presidency, has Trump achieved a good start? Has he proved that he could end up being a “great president”? Is it possible for Trump to create the new America that he has promised?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Elections, Donald Trump, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

7. Trumpism and International Relations: At the Threshold of Deideologization

Author:
E. Solovyev
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
East View Information Services
Abstract:
eLection oF DonALD truMp and his active efforts to undermine the foreign and domestic policy course inherited from the obama admin- istration sent waves of concern across the Western analytical community. his inaugural address had a bombshell effect on Western mainstream media. his close to perfect populist speech (calling “to drain the Washington swamp” and “give power back to the people”) was national- ist at the brink of “isolationism.”1 he looked like a perfect right-wing populist and no exception to the common rule: clearly defined problems and real and urgent questions never supplied with clear (or rational) answers.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Elections, Populism, Ideology, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

8. An Outlook for the Domestic and Foreign Policies of the New Administration of the US --Observations over the President-Elect Trump before Inauguration

Author:
Pangoal Institution
Publication Date:
11-2016
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pangoal Institution
Abstract:
On November 9, 2016, defeating Hilary Clinton, Donald Trump was elected as the 45th American president. At the same time, the Republican Party secured majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Since November 9, 2016, Trump and his team have been working day and night on issues including personnel, policies, public opinions, and foreign relations to prepare for the inauguration on January 20, 2017. During this time, Trump has touched upon the China issue more frequently and casually compared to his predecessors, and with distinct deal mentality. It has raised more uncertainties in China about the relationship with the US after Trump takes office. The prospect we have to be concerned about is that the No.1 threat confronting China-US relationship in the future is the dominance of offensive realism and antagonistic behavior. And zero-sum pattern is starting to encroach trade and economic ties which have long been the cornerstone of the bilateral relations. The following is an observation report on what the president-elect has done and said since he won the election. All of the content is based on public information and is hereby presented to you. We hope it can help readers gain clear thinking on where America and China-US relationship are going and also offer informative reading to people who care about the bilateral relations. The report is divided into six parts, aiming to present in a systematic and comprehensive way all the preparation made by Donald Trump and his team and forecast the Trump administration’s way of governance. Due to limited space, we have to focus only on issues closely related to the interests of China. We appreciate your understanding.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Elections, Donald Trump, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

9. The Foreign Policy Case For Senate Reform

Author:
Paul Nadeau
Publication Date:
06-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Diplomatic Courier
Abstract:
In a famous story about the creation of the Senate, Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were debating a possible upper legislative chamber over tea, and Jefferson wanted to know why it was necessary to create an undemocratic body like the Senate. In response, Washington asked Jefferson why he had poured some of his tea into a saucer. “To cool it,” Jefferson answered, to which Washington replied “Even so, we pour legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it.” The story (even if it might be apocryphal) illustrates that the slowness and deliberation of the Senate were intentional and designed to offset the popular passions that might govern the House of Representatives. The Senate’s rules were designed to emulate a gentleman’s club (such as the filibuster, which originated from the idea that gentlemen would have the good sense to limit the length of their speeches and that it would be rude to cut them off) but have become archaic as the body changed from a club to a typical legislative chamber. The rules of the Senate as they are currently designed have resulted in giving the opposition a trump card that is usually disproportionate to their legislative power. While its original structure incentivized moderation and compromise, the electoral system that populates its membership has incentivized partisanship. As a result the Senate has changed its form but not its function. The Senate can be deferential and deliberate or it can be factional and partisan, but it can’t be both.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America