Search results

AbstractObjectiveThis study examines the association between political identity and young adults' fertility desires from 1989 to 2019.BackgroundUnderstanding the factors that shape fertility preferences is important because these preferences are the critical bridge between social forces and fertility. Identity is a theorized, but understudied, predictor of fertility desires. The increasing salience of political identity suggests that the association between political identity and fertility desires has strengthened over time.MethodData come from the 1989–2019 waves of Monitoring the Future, a nationally representative study of 12th graders (N = 67,557). Regression models examined how political identity (measured by Republican or Democrat preference) predicts the desired number of children, measured both continuously and categorically.ResultsRegardless of the period, Republicans desired more children than Democrats—a difference that grew over time, from 0.07 in 1989–1993 to 0.29 in 2014–2019. Differences in religiosity and attitudes toward gender and childbearing explained pre‐2004 partisan gaps. From 2004 and onward, these factors attenuated, but did not fully explain, Republican–Democrat gaps. In later periods, relative to Democrats, Republicans still wanted more children on average, had a higher probability of wanting four or more children in 2004–2013 and a lower probability of eschewing parenthood in 2014–2019.ConclusionPolitical identity has become increasingly salient for fertility desires, suggesting that identity might shape fertility intentions and future fertility behavior.

SOME OF THE FEATURES OF THE ORDINARY LANGUAGE METHOD IN PHILOSOPHY HAVE SURVIVED IN RECENT POLITICAL THEORY. THE METHOD'S DRAWBACK IS ITS CONCEPTUAL CONSERVATISM, WHICH MAY GO UNNOTICED WHEN IT IS EMPLOYED RATHER THAN DISCUSSED. PENNOCK'S RECENT ARGUMENTS ABOUT LIBERTY ARE SHOWN TO RELY ON THE METHOD AT CRUCIAL POINTS, IN SUCH A WAY AS TO GIVE UNJUSTIFIED SUPPORT TO THE CONCEPT OF NEGATIVE LIBERTY. MORE SURPRISINGLY, THERE IS COMMON GROUND BETWEEN THE ORDINARY LANGUAGE METHOD AND EMPIRICAL DEMOCRATIC THEORY. RECENT ATTEMPTS TO SHOW THE IDEOLOGICAL NATURE OF SUCH THEORY ARE CRITICIZED IN THE LIGHT OF FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT THE ILLOCUTIONARY FORCE ATTACHING TO THE CONCEPT OF DEMOCRACY. FINALLY, AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE ORDINARY LANGUAGE METHOD OF ENQUIRY IS SKETCHED.

Research on the public approval of American governors has focused almost exclusively on the impact of economic conditions on fluctuations in such approval. This article adds events variables to a model of gubernatorial public approval including the more commonly used economic variables, & tests this model in a time-series analysis in three states. The results suggest that the effect of political events is minimal & mixed. Furthermore, the analysis does not clearly support any general theory of gubernatorial approval. Instead, the factors that influence public support for governors seem to vary across time & state. 4 Tables, 22 References. Adapted from the source document.