Suchergebnisse

Noticeably absent from the family leave literature are systematic
investigations of the conditions likely to spur the adoption of advanced
family leave policies. In this article, I systematically examine--in
the form of three detailed case studies--factors that may contribute
to cross-national variations in the quality of leave benefits. The
central questions I explore are: 1) in what ways do the leave policies
of industrialized nation states vary; and 2) what factors best explain
such variation? I first explain the tool of analysis--the comparative
method--and offer rationale for case selection. I also define the
dependent variable, delineating its dimensions, and describe the four
explanatory variables, forming them into explicit hypotheses. In the
next section, I highlight each of three cases (the United States, Sweden,
and Germany), examining their current leave policies and the historical
shaping of their present provisions. Finally, I explicitly compare the
cases, and close with suggestions for future research.

Scholars are divided on whether increased group size helps or hurts political minorities. We test the concept of "critical mass" using a different kind of long-time minority: pre-realignment Republicans in the American South. In Arkansas, after a century of token status, the minority party doubled its numbers in the late 1990s, held steady through the 2000s, then surged to a super majority. This stair-stepped transformation opened a unique window to address a question thus far examined only cross-sectionally: is an outgroup's influence enhanced by an increase in numbers or does success become less likely as the majority reacts to a growing threat? We find support for the latter. As the minority expands, the likelihood their bills will be adopted, relative to majority bills, decreases markedly. The widened deficit is not, however, the consequence of diminished Republican success, but rather of a Democratic surge.

ObjectivesDoes the presence of a particular high‐profile female politician influence how citizens think about women in politics generally?MethodsWe randomly assigned respondents in four statewide polls either to receive a cue about Hillary Clinton followed by a battery of questions about women in politics generally, or to hear only the women in politics battery.ResultsDrawing on scholarship from social psychology about the role of exemplars in auto evaluation, our results indicate that most individuals still hold gendered perceptions toward women in public office, but also that pushing the Clinton button first neither diminishes nor aggravates gendered expectations broadly. This is true even among males and Republicans, whom past scholarship suggests would be most susceptible to exemplar effects, and regardless of whether respondents were primed to think about Clinton as a diplomat or a candidate.ConclusionsOur findings challenge the view that specific high‐profile female politicians will influence public perception of women's leadership qualifications generally.

Contact with individual lesbians and gay men leads to more positive evaluations of the group and more support for pro-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) public policies. Increasingly, gay rights activists are making 'gay families' central to their communications to the public about gay issues and policies. This prompts a new question in the area of contact theory: does contact with same-sex couples have a different impact on attitudes about gays/lesbians and gay-related public policies than contact with gay/lesbian individuals? On general attitudes, the two versions of contact perform similarly, but in specific policies, divergence shows itself. Contact with couples is a stronger force in shaping support for expansion of same-sex partnership recognition. However, while contact with individual gay men and lesbians is a significant indicator, contact with couples is not on other issues raising questions about the effectiveness of the focus on 'gay families' for the broader goals of the contemporary LGBT movement. Adapted from the source document.

Objectives. Just after three in four Arkansas voters endorsed a state constitutional amendment barring state recognition of same‐sex marriages, a comprehensive state‐level survey allowed a closer look into the attitudes of Arkansans on a variety of gay‐ and lesbian‐related issues. When placed in the context of Arkansas's political culture and ideological patters, this serves as a case study of the relationship between public opinion, specific policy issues, and the diffusion (or nondiffusion) of policies in an individual state.Methods. The 2005 Arkansas Poll included a battery of questions gauging citizens' attitudes on gay/lesbian individuals and the morality of same‐sex relations, same‐sex partner recognition, bans on gay adoption and foster parenting, bans on gays openly serving in the U.S. military, and expansion of civil rights laws to bar discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, among other policies. This article reports those survey results and employs regression/logistic analysis in analyzing them.Results. The results reveal that while Arkansans are uncomfortable with homosexuality, they are surprisingly hesitant to prescribe state‐sanctioned discrimination.Conclusions. This tightrope between libertarianism and angst about homosexuality that resulted in policy nondiffusion until three years after the data reported here is reflective of the state's political culture, which combines traditionalistic and individualistic elements.

AbstractVoters in nearly half the states adopted term limits between 1990 and 2000, and recent efforts to repeal or extend these caps generally have suffered sound defeats. Past research demonstrates that while robust majorities approved of limiting the terms of elected officials, support was strongest among government cynics and minority-party identifiers. Here, we investigate the impact of trust and partisanship on attitudes toward a 2004 Arkansas proposal to extend term limits; we further test our findings using survey data on a related 2002 measure in California. Relying on statewide samples of likely voters, we find that Democrats and those with more trust in government demonstrate greater support for such measures than Republicans and cynics, controlling for other factors. Trust exerts the strongest substantive effect.

Voters in nearly half the states adopted term limits between 1990 and 2000, and recent efforts to repeal or extend these caps generally have suffered sound defeats. Past research demonstrates that while robust majorities approved of limiting the terms of elected officials, support was strongest among government cynics and minority-party identifiers. Here, we investigate the impact of trust and partisanship on attitudes toward a 2004 Arkansas proposal to extend term limits; we further test our findings using survey data on a related 2002 measure in California. Relying on statewide samples of likely voters, we find that Democrats and those with more trust in government demonstrate greater support for such measures than Republicans and cynics, controlling for other factors. Trust exerts the strongest substantive effect. Adapted from the source document.

Against popular opinion, largely predicated on the 1957 events surrounding the desegregation of Central High School in Little Rock, AK's political history is actually one of relative racial tolerance. Examined here is whether this situation translated into meaningful political participation by African Americans for the remainder of the 20th century. House & senate journals of the state's general assembly are used to analyze the numbers & role of blacks in this legislative body, 1972-1999, & to examine the voting patterns of black & white Republicans & Democrats on several key race-related issues (civil rights & school desegregation), as well as on more general issues. It is concluded that, though the number of African American state legislators has increased steadily, neither "descriptive" nor "substantive" representation has been achieved. References. K. Hyatt Stewart

Against popular opinion, largely predicated on the 1957 events surrounding the desegregation of Central High School in Little Rock, AK's political history is actually one of relative racial tolerance. Examined here is whether this situation translated into meaningful political participation by African Americans for the remainder of the 20th century. House & senate journals of the state's general assembly are used to analyze the numbers & role of blacks in this legislative body, 1972-1999, & to examine the voting patterns of black & white Republicans & Democrats on several key race-related issues (civil rights & school desegregation), as well as on more general issues. It is concluded that, though the number of African American state legislators has increased steadily, neither "descriptive" nor "substantive" representation has been achieved. References. K. Hyatt Stewart