Determinants of Municipal Bond Ratings for General‐Purpose Governments: An Empirical Analysis

In the wake of the destabilization of the tax‐exempt bond insurance industry, this paper presents an ordered probit model of the determinants of the credit ratings of 965 county and city governments from throughout the nation. The underlying Moody's rating of these governments is posited as a function of a vector of publicly available economic, demographic, governmental, fiscal, and financial variables. The empirical results demonstrate the relative importance of economic base diversity, the growth rates of earnings, and population as well as existing full faith and credit debt on credit ratings. Additionally, our findings support the proposition that the existence of tax limits reduce the perception of credit quality, while expenditure limits raise credit ratings.     

THE ECOLOGY OF GANG TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES*

Within any type of system, the actors in the system inevitably compete over resources. With competition comes the possibility of conflict. To minimize such effects, actors often will partition the system into geographic territories. It is against the larger ecological backdrop of competition and conflict that we examine territory formation among urban street gangs. Although previous studies have examined the social and built environment where gangs form, and how the presence of a gang influences local levels of violence, we know little about how competitive interactions are tied to the formation and maintenance of gang territories. We use formal spatial Lotka–Volterra competition models to derive hypotheses about competition‐driven territory formation. By using data on 563 between‐gang shootings, involving 13 rival street gangs in the Hollenbeck Policing Division of Los Angeles, we show that violence strongly clusters along the boundaries between gangs in a way that is quantitatively predicted by the theory. The results suggest that even weak competitive interactions between gangs are sufficient to drive gang territory formation without recourse to other processes or assumptions.     

Correctness and Cognitivism. Remarks on Robert Alexy's Argument from the Claim to Correctness*

The argument from the claim to correctness has been put forward by Robert Alexy to defend the view that normative utterances admit of objective answers. My purpose in this paper is to preserve this initial aspiration even at the cost of diverting from some of the original ideas in support of the argument. I begin by spelling out a full‐blooded version of normative cognitivism, against which I propose to reconstruct the argument from the claim to correctness. I argue that the context of uttering normative propositions points to the possibility of normative cognition, but does not constitute it. What constitutes the possibility of cognition is, as of necessity, the propositional structure of norms. I conclude that the argument from the claim to correctness ought to safeguard a distinction between the context of uttering a normative sentence and the proposition that individuates the content of the utterance.