Legislators and Administrators: Complex Relationships Complicated by Term Limits

State legislators' relationships with administrators have received scant attention in the literature despite the importance of these relationships for delivery of public services. We explored whether or not the legislator‐administrator relationship in one professional state legislature resembles Congress's oversight of federal agencies. We also assessed whether or not term limits changed this relationship. Our findings indicate that monitoring state agencies was a low priority for this legislature, and it dropped even lower after term limits were implemented. More specifically, we found some institutional roles to be associated with legislators placing a higher priority on monitoring, especially before term limits, whereas some individual motives were associated with a lower priority, especially after term limits. Legislators exhibited more confusion about the process of monitoring after term limits.     

Do populist values or civic values drive support for referendums in Europe?

Representative democracy gives voters the right to influence who governs but its influence on policy making is only indirect. Free and fair referendums give voters the right to decide a policy directly. Elected representatives usually oppose referendums as redundant at best and as undermining their authority at worst. Democratic theorists tend to take electing representatives as normal and as normatively superior. The nominal association of popular decision making and populism has strengthened this negative view. Public opinion surveys show substantial support for holding referendums on important issues. Two major theories offer contrasting explanations for popular support for referendums; they reflect populist values or a commitment to the civic value of participation. This innovative paper tests an integrated model of both theories by the empirical analysis of a 17-country European survey. There is substantial support for all three civic hypotheses: referendum endorsement is positively influenced by attitudes towards participation, democratic ideals and whether elected representatives are perceived as responsive. By contrast, there is no support for populist hypotheses that the socioeconomically weak and excluded favour referendums and minimal support for the effect of extreme ideologies. The conclusion shows that most criticisms of referendums also apply to policy making by elected representatives. While referendums have limits on their use, there is a democratic argument for holding such ballots on major issues to see whether or not a majority of voters endorse the choice of their nominal representatives.     

WHERE OFFENDERS CHOOSE TO ATTACK: A DISCRETE CHOICE MODEL OF ROBBERIES IN CHICAGO*

Why do robbers choose a particular area to commit an offense? Do they rob close to home? Do they search for areas with suitable and attractive targets? What keeps them away from certain areas? To answer these questions, a model is developed of how robbers choose target areas. The model draws on various theoretical and empirical traditions, which include environmental criminology, journey to crime research, gang research, and social disorganization theory. Testing the model on cleared robbery cases in Chicago in the years 1996–1998, we demonstrate that robbery location choice is related to characteristics of target areas, to areas where offenders live, to joint characteristics of the resident and target areas, and to characteristics of the offenders themselves. The presence of illegal markets and other crime generators and crime attractors make areas attractive for robbers, whereas collective efficacy seems to keep them out. Distance as well as racial and ethnic segregation restrict the mobility of offenders.     

It's Only Made Things Worse: A Critique of Electoral Reform in Britain

Since it came to power, New Labour has introduced a range of new electoral system into the British political system, implicitly accepting the argument that Britain's traditional electoral system - first-past-the-post (FPTP) - has been a cause of voter disenchantment with Britain's representative democracy. In this article, it is asserted that Labour's reforms have merely compounded this problem, while demonstrating that all electoral systems have significant flaws. Indeed, it is argued that the flaws of the new systems are more serious than those of FPTP and threaten an even greater disconnection between UK politicians and the people they represent."     

Fair Treatment in a Divided Society: A Bottom‐up Assessment of Bureaucratic Encounters in Latvia

In real‐world bureaucratic encounters the Weberian goal of perfect impersonal administration is not completely attained and unfairness sometimes results. Theories of bias attribute unfairness to social characteristics such as income, education, ethnicity, and gender. A random theory characterizes unfairness as the result of idiosyncratic conditions that give everyone an equal probability of being treated unfairly regardless of their social characteristics. In Latvia, bias would be expected on grounds of ethnicity as well as social characteristics, since its population is divided politically by citizenship, language, and ethnicity as well as socioeconomic characteristics. Survey data from the New Baltic Barometer shows that a majority of both Latvians and Russians expect fair treatment in bureaucratic encounters and multivariate statistical analysis confirms the random hypothesis. Insofar as unfair treatment occurs it tends to be distributed according to idiosyncratic circumstances rather than being the systematic fate of members of a particular social group. The evidence indicates that the professional norms and training of service deliverers are more important in bureaucratic encounters than individual attributes of claimants, even in a clearly divided society.     

GENDER,STREETLIFE AND CRIMINAL RETALIATION*

Recent work in criminology has highlighted the central role of retaliation in shaping criminal violence in America's inner cities. Most of this work, however, has been based on male offenders. It has also failed to consider whether and how gender structures payback in real‐life settings and circumstances. In this paper, we analyze in‐depth, semi‐structured interviews with forty men and twelve women who recently engaged in one or more episodes of retaliatory violence to examine the ways in which gender shapes vengeance. We hope to provide an insider's view of how gender frames the context and dynamics of retaliatory events for both men and women.     

BIG PEOPLE HIT LITTLE PEOPLE: SEX DIFFERENCES IN PHYSICAL POWER AND INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE*

The role of physical size and strength in sex differences in violence is examined using a sample of ex-offenders, ex-mental patients, and the general population. In incidents not involving weapons, males are more likely than females to engage in attacks and injure their adversaries, and females are more likely to be attacked and injured, primarily because of differences in physical power. In incidents involving weapons, the greater power of males is partially neutralized, and females are more likely than males to injure their adversary. The results show that physical differences between men and women are an important factor in explaining sex differences in violence.