Clientelism and polarized voting: empirical evidence

One must take country-specific institutional features into account when analyzing former communist countries’ transformation process to new political institutions. We do so for post-communist Albania, where the regional and cultural polarization that has existed for centuries has evolved to clientelism in the new democracy. We show how clientelistic parties give rise to very particular voting patterns. These reveal major differences across regions not only in party choice but also in voters’ responses to government policies. These responses depend on the party in government and on the region concerned. This is in sharp contrast with results obtained when applying the same model to a large number of more advanced democracies with similar electoral institutions. A proper evaluation of democratization in Albania thus requires looking beyond the formal institutions governing elections and taking clientelism and its effect on voter behavior into account.     

The impact of surplus sharing on the portfolio mix of public sector defined benefit pension plans: a public choice approach

The riskiness of state employee pension plan portfolios varies across states. We investigate whether this variation is related to how public employees and taxpayers share actuarial surpluses of pension accounts. We focus on two determinants of a plan’s asset mix: the relative influence of public employees to taxpayers; and whether a surplus-sharing contract is specified. Our theoretical model demonstrates that the effect of public employee influence on the asset mix is ambiguous. Our empirical results corroborate this complex theoretical result. In our theoretical and empirical analyses, if a surplus sharing rule is specified, plans adopt a more aggressive investment allocation.     

On the Rights of Undocumented Children

Changes in immigration laws over the last three to four decades have given rise to unprecedented numbers of undocumented children. However, as others have argued, policies regarding the control of undocumented migration have had deleterious effects on undocumented children and their basic access to social rights. Undocumented youth in the United States can legally attend K-12 education, but cannot legally work, vote, receive financial aid, or drive in most states. Their situation calls for a reexamination of immigration laws and a recasting of the frame that has been used to promote their inclusion.

A New Measure of Policy Spending Priorities in the American States

In this paper, we develop and test a general measure of policyexpenditures in the American states. Our approach is to constructa spatial proximity model of yearly state program spending.The empirical analysis reveals that state spending patternsvary along a clear and readily-interpretable unidimensionalcontinuum which differentiates policies that provide particularizedbenefits to needy constituencies from policies that providebroader collective goods. Based upon standard evaluative criteria,the variable created from our model possesses some highly desirablecharacteristics. And, it compares favorably to other measuresof state policy activity. The net result is a yearly score foreach state which summarizes that state's spending across allmajor program areas. More generally, we believe that our variablecan be interpreted as valid and reliable representational measurementof state policy priorities. In this capacity, it could occupyan important position within models of state politics. Author's note: Many colleagues provided useful feedback on earlierversions of this paper. We particularly appreciate the excellentcomments and suggestions from Robert Erikson, Richard Fording,Kim Hill, David Lowery, Andrea McAtee, and George Rabinowitz.We would also like to thank Daniel Lewis and William Myers fortheir assistance with the data collection. The yearly statepolicy priority scores obtained from the unfolding analysis,along with the data used to create the scores, the SAS macroto carry out the unfolding procedure, and all other supplemental materialsare available on the authors’ web sites: http://polisci.msu.edu/jacobyand http://polisci.msu.edu/schneider. All these materials arealso available on the Political Analysis Web site.     

Construct Validity of Adolescent Antisocial Personality Disorder

This study examined the construct validity of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) diagnosed in adolescence. Boys and girls were grouped by history of DSM-III-R conduct disorder (CD) and ASPD: Controls (n=340) had neither diagnosis; CD Only (n=77) had CD by age 17 but no ASPD through age 20; Adolescent ASPD (n = 64) had ASPD by age 17. The Adolescent ASPD group was then compared to 20 young adult men who met criteria for ASPD (ASPD group). As expected, the Adolescent ASPD group had significantly more depression and substance use disorders, a greater performance>verbal IQ discrepancy, more deviant peers, and poorer academic functioning than the CD Only group and Controls. The Adolescent ASPD and ASPD groups did not differ on most variables. Results support the construct validity of Adolescent ASPD and suggest that such a diagnosis could help identify adolescents at risk for persistent antisocial behavior. Jeanette Taylor is an Assistant Professor at Florida State University. She received her Ph.D. in 1999 from the University of Minnesota. Her research examines biological, cognitive, and environmental influences on personality disorders and substance use disorders. Irene J. Elkins is a Co-investigator at the Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research. She received her Ph.D. in 1993 from the University of Kansas and is a member of the Society for Research on Psychopathology. Her major research interests include the relationship of personality, ADHD, and antisocial behavior to substance abuse, as well as gene-environment interrelationships. Lisa Legrand is a Research Associate with the Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research at the University of Minnesota. She received her Ph.D. in 2003 from the University of Minnesota. Her major research interests include gene-environment interplay in the development of externalizing psychopathology. Dawn Peuschold is a Senior Clinical Forensic Psychologist at the Hennepin Country District Court and an instructor at the University of Minnesota. She completed a post-doctoral fellowship in forensic psychology at the University of Massachusetts Medical School after receiving her Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Minnesota. She is interested in risk factors for reoffense in juveniles. William G. Iacono is a Distinguished McKnight University Professor at the University of Minnesota, the institution from which he received his Ph.D. in psychology. He conducts longitudinal studies of adolescent twins and adoptees aimed at understanding the development of adult adjustment and mental health.     

Does Familiarity Breed Contempt? The Impact of Information on Mass Attitudes toward Congress

Two features of citizen response to Congress can be taken as grounds for concern. First, Americans know relatively little about Congress, and especially about congressional procedures and policy output. Second, Congress typically emerges as the least respected political institution. Although these matters are troubling when viewed individually, more disturbing is the dilemma posed when knowledge and attitudes toward Congress are viewed in tandem. It appears that citizens who know Congress the best like Congress the least. Consequently, a sophisticated polity and a well-respected legislature seem fundamentally incompatible. This article seeks to resolve this dilemma, contending that there is nothing about knowledge per se that leads citizens to view Congress unfavorably. Rather, differences in knowledge levels alter the considerations citizens bring to bear when evaluating Congress, with the best-informed individuals constructing judgments on the basis of the most relevant Congress-specific criteria while less knowledgeable citizens employ readily available but more peripheral criteria.