No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

On July 1, 1971, the Twenty-Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified which prohibited states from denying citizens who had attained the age of eighteen the right to vote. Having passed 96-0 in the Senate and 401-19 in the House of Representatives, the amendment was widely considered a bipartisan effort with minimal resistance from within the two major political parties. This paper seeks to determine how this largely politically unifying amendment process became so politicized since its passage, including an analysis and comparison of factions who fought against initial passage with those who seek to suppress the youth vote. A historical analysis will look deeper into how those battles were won with the ultimate passage of the amendment. Using a mixed methodology approach including a quantitative analysis of polling data and a qualitative analysis of partisan methods to influence youth voter turnout, the paper shows a trend towards increased politicization that has peaked in today's political landscape. Three specific elections serve as case studies and a lens through which to analyze changes in the law, changes in campaign strategies, changes in rhetoric, and changes in salient issues. Youth engagement is particularly valuable to political leaders and to the nation. In American politics, youth voter turnout has become less of a normative good--in many cases it has been deeply politicized. There is a strong association between specific methods taken by political parties and interest groups and their efforts to mobilize or disincentive youth voter turnout. / Master of Arts / A Constitutional amendment requires two-thirds of the House of Representatives and two-thirds of the Senate to propose it and then must be ratified by three-fourths of the states. This process is difficult to accomplish and one that requires bipartisanship in Congress and must have broad support throughout the nation. Outside of the original Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments, only seventeen amendments have been ratified since the inception of the Constitution. The Twenty-Sixth Amendment is an important milestone in the history of the United States as it ultimately lowered the voting age to 18 throughout the country. The amendment passed 96-0 in the Senate and 401-19 in the House of Representatives and was passed by the necessary number of states in less than four months. It marked the quickest ratification timeline of any amendment in the history of the United States. The amendment was a largely bipartisan effort with minimal resistance from within the two major political parties. This paper seeks to determine how this largely politically unifying amendment process has become so politicized since its passage. The paper shows a trend towards increased politicization that has peaked in today's political landscape. Three specific elections serve as case studies and a lens through which to analyze changes in attitudes about young voters. As a high school teacher who values the importance of youth engagement and voting, I provide some strategies that I believe will help overcome the level of polarization and voter suppression laws that have recently been enacted. Both of the two major political parties have an incentive to engage young voters and encourage them to show up for their side.

Prior literature has identified several simultaneously occurring trends: namely, sharply intensifying negative partisanship, partisan patterns of media trust, increasingly partisan content on cable news networks, and increased viewership of these networks. A large portion of this literature, as well as journalistic research, has predominantly focused on individuals' consumption, rather than trust, of particular political media sources. I explore to what degree the nature of how individuals are consuming partisan media (be it trustingly, skeptically, etc.) plays a role in the relationship between partisan media consumption and partisan sentiment. Using OLS regression models across three ANES samples, I test the relationship between individuals' viewership and trust levels of particular partisan cable news sources (Fox News and MSNBC) and corresponding partisan sentiment, taking into account individuals' own partisan leanings. I find those who consume like-minded partisan media to express more partisanship (both for their own political group and against the other). I additionally find that trust, as opposed to just viewership, of these partisan networks correlates strongly with partisan sentiment. In light of these findings, I conclude that future research on this topic should more clearly distinguish between trust and viewership of political media. / Master of Arts / Over the last two decades, surging mass political polarization has occurred simultaneously with a strikingly more segmented and increasingly partisan news media landscape. A large portion of research on this topic, both academic and journalistic, has focused exclusively on individuals' viewership or consumption levels of particular media sources. Relying solely on consumption does not take into account the trust levels that individuals have in what they are consuming. In this study, I explore to what degree the nature of how individuals are consuming partisan media (be it trustingly, skeptically, etc.) plays a role in the relationship between partisan media consumption and partisan feelings. Utilizing multiple American National Election Studies samples, I test the relationship between individuals' viewership and trust levels of particular partisan cable news sources (Fox News and MSNBC) and corresponding partisan sentiment, taking into account individuals' own partisan leanings. I find those who consume like-minded partisan media (Republicans watching Fox News and Democrats watching MSNBC) to express increased levels of partisanship - both for their own political group and against the other. I additionally find a strong relationship between individuals' trust, as opposed to just viewership, of these partisan networks and their own partisan feelings. In light of these findings, I conclude that future research on this topic should more clearly distinguish between trust and viewership of political media.

The Federalist Society, acting as a Political Epistemic Network, has effectively employed a long-term strategy to engineer a Supreme Court that propagates conservative legal ideology. The organizational structure of the Federalist Society finds, recruits, and retain members who will wield the organizational strategies of the organizations to achieve policy outcomes not just for members of the organization, but for the greater population. This thesis demonstrates a clear relationship between the long-term ideological and institutional influence of the Federalist Society and the U.S. Supreme Court. This significant relationship poses a fundamental threat to the execution of equal protection under the law and an erosion of democratic norms. This thesis proposes possible legislative and constitutional remedies to counter the increasing polarization of the Supreme Court, including proposed reforms such as term limits and restructuring the court which could make inroads to promoting neutrality on the Court and re-establishing a greater degree of public trust. / Master of Arts / The modern Supreme Court must contend with an unprecedented degree of outside influence from ideologically driven special interest groups. Since 1982, there is no outside special interest group of more consequence than the Federalist Society. Modern special interest groups can boast deeper financial reserves, decades of relationship with policy makers, and ideological motivations that are not simply deeply held, but singularly motivating. This is particularly true for the Federalist Society. The conservative legal movement has effectively employed a long-term strategy to shape the Court in its own image, minimizing a reliance on an electorate that is more diverse and historically less likely to embrace conservative principles. Above any other political ally or mechanism, that strategy and its implementation has relied on the commitment, financing, and participation of the Federalist Society. This thesis examines the breadth and consequences of the Federalist Society's influence on the modern Court and proposes theoretical reforms that could help ensure a more ideologically balanced court.

No description available.

I contribute to research pertaining to young voters by comparing the 2016 agenda of young people (based on existing polling) with Republican and Democratic Party platforms. By analyzing party platforms in the context of Millennial voters, this thesis attempts to determine the effectiveness to which the Democratic and Republican platforms reflect young people’s interests on three key topics: education, terrorism and homeland security, and racism. I argue that the Democratic Party’s progressive platform offers more substantial solutions to Millennial concerns than the GOP. By catering to young voter’s progressive, pro-big government, anti-racist agenda, the Democratic Party may one day bolster a formidable coalition of support for future elections.

O papel dos partidos políticos na política externa brasileira é uma questão tradicionalmente polêmica, assim como é a polarização política nessa área. Dentro desse contexto, e diante da crescente presença de atores subnacionais com grande capacidade de atuação no contexto internacional, cabe avaliar se essas questões estendem-se também a outros níveis administrativos além do governo federal. Sendo assim, este trabalho visa primeiro a examinar a teoria acerca da polarização política no nível municipal. Mais especificamente, procura perceber se as diferenças ideológicas entre os partidos políticos no nível municipal influenciam a forma como é feita a inserção internacional das cidades. Num segundo momento, tendo São Paulo como objeto de análise, este trabalho avalia se há influência partidária nas estratégias de inserção internacional da cidade em duas diferentes gestões: Marta Suplicy, do PT (2001-2004), e José Serra, PSDB/Gilberto Kassab, DEM (2005-2008). Após a avaliação de documentos e entrevistas com funcionários da Secretaria de Relações Internacionais, conclui-se que o partido dos governantes influencia as estratégias paradiplomáticas da cidade, provocando descontinuidade das políticas municipais da área e modificando objetivos e eixos de atuação. / The role of political parties in the Brazilian external policy is a traditionally contentious issue, as well as the polarization of the field. Within this context, and considering the growing presence of subnational actors with great capacity for action in the international scenario, it is important to assess whether these questions can also be extended to other administrative levels besides the federal government. Thus, this research aims first at examining the theory about political polarization in city administrations. More specifically, it seeks to understand whether the ideological differences among political parties at the city level influence the way cities act internationally. Secondly, considering São Paulo as the object of analysis, this work assesses whether political parties influence the strategies of international performance of the city in two different administrations: Marta Suplicy, from PT (2001-2004), and José Serra, from PSDB/Gilberto Kassab, from DEM (2005-2008). After evaluating documents and interviewing employees of the Secretariat of International Relations of the city of São Paulo, we conclude that the governor\'s party does influence the paradiplomatic strategies of the city, thus creating discontinuity in the city policies of the field and altering objectives and axis of action.