Dr. Peter Francia recently completed the article, “The White Working Class, Union Households, and Trade: Will the Trump Coalition Endure?” for the journal, Society.

Abstract: Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election caught many political experts by surprise. Looking to uncover the reasons for this surprising outcome, social scientists presented several explanations in the election’s aftermath. In this article, I discuss one of these explanations: Trump’s success in winning white working-class voters by an overwhelming margin. I also discuss his success in narrowing the advantage that Democratic presidential candidates typically enjoy with voters in union households. Using data from the 2012 and 2016 National Election Pool (NEP), and the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), the results in this work show that Donald Trump not only won the support of white working class voters and that he was competitive with voters in union households, but that he significantly improved the Republican share of the presidential vote from four years earlier among voters in these two blocs, including in three critical battleground states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Trump’s protectionist position on free trade and his opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which differed from previous Republican presidential nominees in recent elections, were especially popular with white working-class voters and those in union households. By expanding previous Republican margins with white working-class voters and by narrowing the Democrats’ typical union household advantage, Trump secured himself victories in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, which ultimately won him the election. Whether or not Trump is able to repeat this in 2020 against Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden will likely determine if he is re-elected. Moreover, if the Trump coalition proves enduring, it could well shape presidential elections and their outcomes in years to come.

Prof. Hugh Lee recently published an article entitled “The Arbitrability of Nursing Home Disputes” in 349 Elder Law Advisory 1 (April 2020) in which he examines the back and forth debate over the inclusion of pre-dispute arbitration agreements in nursing home admission contracts. This largely reflects changing policy from the Department of Health and Human Services concerning whether Medicare- and Medicaid-approved nursing homes may include such provisions. Prof. Lee is a nationally recognized expert in this area of the law.

We are excited to start the 2nd 8-week block this Thursday October 1st.

This is going to be challenging and exciting but short semester!

Abstract: Until recently, East Carolina University (ECU) had a small culture of marches, protests, and other free speech actions. However, police-involved shootings in Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, followed by the 2016 summer of violence with the mass shooting in Orlando and more police-involved shootings in New York, Chicago, Minnesota, and Texas, dramatically changed the culture at ECU. During the 2016-17 academic year, ECU student organizations hosted more than 25 campus protests and demonstrations—relatively few compared to other institutions, but a large increase for our campus community. Even with wide-ranging topics — from Black Lives Matter to Turning Point USA speakers and rallies from Donald Trump and Bill Clinton — ECU experienced virtually no disruptions in service. Indeed, when the infamous “send her back” chant directed at Rep. Ilhan Omar emerged at a Trump rally on ECU’s campus, our institution found ways to quickly manage the fallout and move forward. Why? Civil discourse.

Through the combination of activities, events, and programmatic efforts, ECU has built a culture that actively engages students in conversations around difficult topics, building an inclusive climate with an eye toward institutionalization. This focused case-study explores how one campus devised comprehensive strategies to address student engagement and direct that interest into the college, community, civic, and public arenas. Specifically, this manuscript will address three broad campus-level efforts around civil discourse, voter mobilization, and democratic educational initiatives.

This three-part model includes both short-term student programs and long-term best practices. Our civil discourse efforts illustrate that teaching students within collegiate settings to deliberate and debate important societal issues assists them in their identity development as well as connects them to their civic responsibilities. Civil dialogues teach our students how to constructively disagree, but also encourage valuable skill development such as listening, counterpoint development, and compromise.

SEE: McCunney, D., Tuchmayer, J. B., Kermiet, T., Stansbury, C., & Kneubuehl, E. (2020). Managing “send her back”: Civil discourse and educating for democracy as campus culture. eJournal of Public Affairs, 9(1), 28-42.

Dr. Samantha Mosier, with Arbindra Rimal, and Megan Ruxton, recently published an article titled “A Song of Disconnect and Disappointment: The Missing Choir of Constituent Preferences in GMO-Labeling Policy Outcomes” in the Review of Policy Research (37(4):511-534). 

Abstract: This article focuses on the degree of policy congruence, and by extension policy responsiveness, of U.S. federal- and state-level GMO labeling laws from 2011–2016. Utilizing consumer survey data, evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates consumers prefer clear text-based indication if food products contain genetically modified ingredients. However, the federal law adopted in 2016 mandates GMO labeling but with exceptions permitted to clear on-package text labeling. The results of this study demonstrate that consumer preferences were not adequately represented at the federal level and were misaligned with state policy activities as captured in the aggregate outcome. State legislatures were actively proposing mandatory legislation with only a few cases of success, which did not adequately represent the wishes of the people. Given the misalignment and overall policy incongruence, the consequences of pending federal law are discussed in light of why the voices of the consumer choir were not heard by lawmakers.

Dr. Brad Lockerbie has applied his academic expertise in the world outside the academy. He served as a consultant in several lawsuits involving absentee ballots. These included suits with regard to collection of ballots, signature requirements, and poll watchers. The national Republican party and state parties in Florida, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania made use of his academic training to ensure free and fair elections.

In this text, Jonathan D. Rosen and Hanna Samir Kassab explore the linkage between weak institutions and government policies designed to combat drug trafficking, organized crime, and violence in Latin America.

Using quantitative analysis to examine criminal violence and publicly available survey data from the Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) to conduct regression analysis, individual case studies on Colombia, Mexico, El Salvador, and Nicaragua highlight the major challenges that governments face and how they have responded to various security issues. Rosen and Kassab later turn their attention to the role of external criminal actors in the region and offer policy recommendations and lessons learned. Questions explored include:

• What are the major trends in organized crime in this country?
• How has organized crime evolved over time?
• Who are the major criminal actors?
• How has state fragility contributed to organized crime and violence (and vice versa)?
• What has been the government’s response to drug trafficking and organized crime?
• Have such policies contributed to violence?

Crime, Violence and the State in Latin America is suitable to both undergraduate and graduate courses in criminal justice, international relations, political science, comparative politics, international political economy, organized crime, drug trafficking, and violence.

Available at Amazon

The Center for Survey Research released a report of a poll taken after the Democratic Party and Republican Party conventions (August 29-30) on the 2020 election in North Carolina. The poll’s results appeared on several websites including Politico, MSNBC, Bloomberg, The Hill, The National Review, The Charlotte Observer, and The Daily Reflector. The Center’s director, Peter Francia, also appeared on evening television with WXII in Winston-Salem and WNCT in Greenville (September 1), as well as the radio program, Talk of the Town (September 2) to discuss the poll’s results with host Henry Hinton.

To all involved in the Center’s work: Nice job! In just a couple of short years, the Center is now recognized as a major player in the polling industry.

Brad Lockerbie recently presented his work on presidential and congressional election forecasting at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. He forecasts continued divided government with the Democrats retaining and enhancing their control of the House and Trump winning reelection.

His forecast in 2016 was right on the money. He was within three-quarters of a percentage point of the actual popular vote.

Dr. Mosier has recently published an article examining various policy responses by government leaders during the pandemic.

Abstract: Policy responses to the Covid-19 pandemic are important to understanding how some governments have been able to effectively combat the crises. Early efforts by many government leaders included policy actions to effectively shut-down society through stay-at-home or shelter-in-place orders. Drawing from several key decision-making theories, this article examines the process of issuing stay-at-home orders in two U.S. States, California and Colorado, with a specific focus on three vice industries: liquor, cannabis, and firearms. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the liquor, marijuana, and gun industry have experienced a dramatic increase in sales. Using policy documents, news articles, and available resources, several decision-making theories help explain the context for how essential businesses were defined in California and Colorado’s stay-at-home orders. As the evidence suggests, a combination of health, economic, and political factors influenced when and how each industry was determined as essential industries. Scientific reasoning alone was not the determining factor for if these vice industries were permitted to continue operations during a global pandemic. As the globe continues to combat Covid-19 this paper sheds some light on balancing of political and economic concerns despite the need to protect public health.

Opp, Susan M. and Samantha L. Mosier. 2020. Liquor, Marijuana, and Guns: Essential Services or Political Tools? Policy Design and Practice

DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2020.1810397