Mandatory retirement and labor-force participation of respondents in the Retirement History Study

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) was amended in 1978 to prohibit mandatory retirement before age 70 in most occupations. The impact of this legislation on the probability of older persons remaining in the labor force is the primary concern of this article. Specifically, questions concerning which older workers are affected by mandatory-retirement provisions and the extent to which they are forced to retire and leave the labor force are examined. Tabular analysis of data from the Retirement History Study on persons aged 62-63 in 1969 shows significant variation in mandatory-retirement coverage between the public and private sectors and across industries, occupations, and demographic groups. Until age 65, the labor-force participation rate of those facing compulsory retirement is higher than or equal to that of those not covered but it drops significantly below the noncovered rate after 65. Logit analysis of the labor-force participation of persons before and after age 65 indicates that mandatory retirement at that age reduces the probability of retirement by approximately 16.7 percentage points for white men wage earners. This results in a decline in the labor-force participation rate of all men aged 66-67 of approximately 4 percentage points.     

Resolution of some enantiomeric amines of forensic interest by high-performance liquid chromatography

The high-performance liquid chromatographic resolution of the enantiomers of amphetamine, methamphetamine, ephedrine, and pseudoephedrine is described. The sugar isothiocyanate, 2,3,4,6-tetra-O-acetyl-beta-D-glucopyranosyl isothiocyanate (GITC), is used as a chiral derivatizing agent, with chromatographic separations of the diastereomers formed with each amine made using a standard achiral C18 stationary phase.     

Are Niche Parties Fundamentally Different from Mainstream Parties? The Causes and the Electoral Consequences of Western European Parties' Policy Shifts, 1976–1998

Do “niche” parties—such as Communist, Green, and extreme nationalist parties—adjust their policies in response to shifts in public opinion? Would such policy responsiveness enhance these parties' electoral support? We report the results of statistical analyses of the relationship between parties' policy positions, voters' policy preferences, and election outcomes in eight Western European democracies from 1976 to 1998 that suggest that the answer to both questions is no . Specifically, we find no evidence that niche parties responded to shifts in public opinion, while mainstream parties displayed consistent tendencies to respond to public opinion shifts. Furthermore, we find that in situations where niche parties moderated their policy positions they were systematically punished at the polls (a result consistent with the hypothesis that such parties represent extreme or noncentrist ideological clienteles), while mainstream parties did not pay similar electoral penalties. Our findings have important implications for political representation, for spatial models of elections, and for political parties' election strategies.