Intervention unnecessary: bar associations taking sides in regulatory actions

Interest groups participate in the political process in a variety of ways. They can lobby the legislature, interact with elected and administrative executive officials, and participate in litigation either as a litigant or an amicus curiae. But the literature is scarce in exploring how interest groups behave when their stakeholders dissent. This study explores the actions by one interest group, the American Bar Association (ABA), in participating in “notice and comment” rulemaking by the Department of Labor where the ABA did not represent the legal profession. It finds that the ABA engaged in astroturfing, and that their efforts were ignored by the Department. This suggests that astroturfing may not be useful in the notice and comment rulemaking process, because the agency's unitary status allows them to discern the centralized origin of the comments. This finding is confirmed by comparing the ABA's influence on the Supreme Court in Boumediene v. Bush, when it did represent the consensus of the legal profession.     

Crowdsourcing and Self-Instruction: Turning the Production of Teaching Materials Into a Learning Objective

This article describes a lesson plan that harnessed students’ abilities to generate new teaching material by constructing country timelines. This involved crowdsourcing, or the reliance upon task inputs from a large number of people to acquire information. The plan was motivated by an approach that conceives of learning as deriving from the joint activity of individuals with shared tools, and was geared toward promoting self-instruction alongside traditional lectures and exams. By relying on independent research and individual contributions to create a new teaching resource, the course facilitated strategic reading and peer learning and promoted a research-active learning environment. The experience encourages instructors to consider ways to use distributed learning in the classroom to make students both the producers and consumers of innovative content.     

How to Succeed at Increasing Spending Without Really Trying: The Balanced Budget Amendment and the Item Veto

Congressional efforts at budgetary reform generally contain procedural impediments designed to limit profligate spending. In particular, the line-item veto and the balanced budget amendment are intended to limit the ability of legislators to pursue their constituents' interests through pork-barrel politics at the expense of the broader public interest. However, assuming that legislators remain motivated by local constituent interests, we argue that these reforms will promote unexpected results. The supermajorities requires by the line-item veto and the balanced budget amendment include incentives for log-rolling that promote – and may indeed increase – pork-barrel spending.     

Boisterous Russia in emerging Europe

Russia is permanently at a crossroads in its history, or standing in exasperation at a fork in the road but failing to resolve a geographical, historical and metaphysical dilemma: is Russia part of Europe or not? Russia holds a key but vulnerable strategic position in the heartland of Eurasia. Its geographical existence within a larger zone of Eurasian civilization meant that Russian culture had been shaped to a not insignificant extent by influences coming from Asia, that Russia was Eurasian and not European not only by virtue of its cultural patterns but also in terms of anthropological–racial considerations as well. The Eurasian Customs Union is clearly seen by Russia as a vehicle for reintegrating the post‐Soviet space, including the countries that fall within the sphere of the European Union's (EU)'s eastern neighbourhood. The Eurasian Customs Union is the vehicle through which Russia increasingly engages in ‘normative rivalry’ with the EU in the so‐called ‘shared neighbourhood’. These geopolitical and economic contraptions underpin the strategic calculations that have influenced largely the crisis of Russian Lebensraum escapade in Ukraine and EU's reaction. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.