Deliberative Democracy in the EU. Countering Populism with Participation and Debate. CEPS Paperback

Elections are the preferred way to freely transfer power from one term to the next and from one political party or coalition to another. They are an essential element of democracy. But if the process of power transfer is corrupted, democracy risks collapse. Reliance on voters, civil society organisations and neutral observers to fully exercise their freedoms as laid down in international human rights conventions is an integral part of holding democratic elections. Without free, fair and regular elections, liberal democracy is inconceivable. Elections are no guarantee that democracy will take root and hold, however. If the history of political participation in Europe over the past 800 years is anything to go by, successful attempts at gaining voice have been patchy, while leaders’ attempts to silence these voices and consolidate their own power have been almost constant (Blockmans, 2020). Recent developments in certain EU member states have again shown us that democratically elected leaders will try and use majoritarian rule to curb freedoms, overstep the constitutional limits of their powers, protect the interests of their cronies and recycle themselves through seemingly free and fair elections. In their recent book How Democracies Die, two Harvard professors of politics write: “Since the end of the Cold War, most democratic breakdowns have been caused not by generals and soldiers but by elected governments themselves” (Levitsky and Ziblatt, 2018)

Political connections of new business ventures

The perceived capability of corporate organizations to influence politics, although fueling an ongoing public debate, features in literature as a source of probable benefits. According to the majority of the pertinent studies, these benefits, more often than not, materialize with important value-adding implications. In the U.S. context, whereby political money contributions constitute the prevalent way of establishing connections, this can result in a hefty return on a firm’s political investment. Our research posits that if political connections formed via monetary donations elevate the donor to a higher status, this should reflect in circumstances whereby a firm needs to assert its quality to other economic agents. This is the case for firms that are plagued by the market newness liability. Whether as a form of insurance from tail risk or entitlement to economic rents, proximity to politics offers legitimacy and a compelling way of introducing a new venture to the marketplace. To prove this conjecture, we mainly draw from IPOs for representing a setting of acute uncertainty. Our findings confirm that both lobbying and PAC (Political Action Committee) expenditure pays off on listing day as donors incur less underpricing; an effect which can be amplified with contribution size and strategic targeting of recipients. Donor IPOs also experience negative offer price revisions and lower aftermarket volatility. Collectively, these results offer new empirical grounding to uncertainty and signaling theories. Subsequently, we frame IPO pricing as an efficiency problem for prospective issuers and develop an approach of general application in finance, where relationships of influence are suspected. Rather than imposing a regression-based framework, we allow relationships to manifest themselves in a data-driven manner. Our analysis reveals nonlinearities between IPO pricing efficiency and the two contribution avenues (justifying the fully nonparametric treatment). We are able to uncover relationships separately according to business sector, which we interpret in terms of varied competitive environments. Broadening up our scope prior to and after the IPO event, we document that connected firms are associated with a longer time to venture or other equity capital financing, attesting to a greater financial autonomy. Additionally, they attain larger market shares and have a superior likelihood of survival in the public domain

Race of the century : Guy vs. Young, 1974 North Dakota U.S. Senate election

As the 1972-1974 election cycle began, Republican incumbent Milton Young, who had served in the U.S. Senate for twenty-seven years, decided to run for another term with realistic confidence in his ability to repeat prior election victories. His initial optimism began to erode as national Republican leaders questioned his ability to defeat his apparent opponent, former North Dakota Governor William L. Guy. Results of public opinion surveys added credibility to the perception of Young\u27s weakness. Guy saw an opportunity to achieve his long-held goal of becoming a U.S. Senator and cautiously laid the groundwork for his campaign. As the two rivals continued their efforts in 1974 and the Watergate scandal reached a crescendo, political observers recognized that a basic realignment of political party dominance could occur when, as seemed most likely, Guy defeated Young. When statewide Democratic candidates received more votes than Republicans for the first time in the history of North Dakota primary elections and Guy\u27s lead in the polls held steady, it appeared that Young would not be able to reverse the tide running against him. The reasons for the eventual reelection of Milton Young can be most effectively determined by recounting the events of the 1974 U.S. Senate election chronologically rather than by tracing subjects or issues, and doing so with each candidate separately. The campaign, devoid of public policy discussion by either candidate, focused on Young\u27s age and congressional seniority. Robert McCarney, a maverick Republican, ran in the Democratic primary, and James Jungroth, a former Democratic legislator and state chairman, ran as an Independent candidate in the general election; both these candidates did so not because of substantive beliefs concerning issues but because they disliked Guy. Young won the election in part because Jungroth took votes away from Guy. Guy lost because he did not accurately perceive the effect of the McCarney challenge, the damage of the financial support that he had accepted from a national lobbying group, and the damage caused by his very cool relationship with North Dakota\u27s Democratic U.S. Senator, Quentin Burdick. Because the outcome of the general election placed Young over Guy by just 177 votes (less than .005 percent difference between them), Guy took advantage of North Dakota law and requested a recount. During the period of the recount, Young and Guy developed an attitude that the winner would be decided by the process. However, the recount was only the final review of the general election results and the winner had been selected by the voters on election day

Structure and strategy in presidential nominating politics since 1960

Summary available: p. 3-4

Der Beitrag von Verfassungsgerichten zur demokratischen Qualität von Wahlen in Sub-Sahara Afrika: Eine vergleichende Studie zu Madagaskar und Senegal

This thesis is the first comparative study on the role of African constitutional courts in elections. Approximately 20 African countries have introduced such courts during the course of the third wave of democratisation. While it is a widespread scholarly assumption that constitutional courts are beneficial for democracy, studies on the actual democratic repercussions of these courts are rare. Moreover, we know little at present about the nature of African constitutional courts and their role in processes of democratisation. This thesis takes specifically the field of electoral disputes as an example by which to examine the influence of constitutional courts on democracy. Elections are a core feature of democracy, and therefore particularly pertinent for studying constitutional courts’ repercussions on it. This approach is furthermore innovative because scholars of electoral integrity have recognised the importance of courts for democratic elections. Yet, theoretical and empirical works that examine this relationship in more detail are currently only pending. To begin to answer the question of how constitutional courts contribute to the democratic quality of elections in African electoral democracies, the constitutional courts of Madagascar and Senegal are examined in a structured, focused comparison. For this purpose, the study develops a novel theoretical framework that captures how constitutional court behaviour is linked, through their functional, ambiguous or dysfunctional interventions, to the democratic quality of elections. As a theoretical innovation, the thesis combines the concept of the “democratic quality of elections” with that of the “electoral cycle” in disentangling how the three democratic qualities of elections – participation, competition and legitimacy – are at stake throughout the six steps of the electoral cycle. For this thesis, an original dataset of 274 constitutional court interventions was compiled during field research stays in Madagascar and in Senegal. The analysis of these interventions was embedded in data from 78 interviews conducted with constitutional court judges, legal experts and politicians, as well as from secondary sources such as legal comments and election observation reports. The analysis revealed that in both countries all three qualities of democratic elections were subject to constraints during the periods of observation. Focusing on the courts’ major decisions, it was observed that both courts responded to the existing constraints on competition and legitimacy with predominantly dysfunctional interventions. The interventions of the Madagascan High Constitutional Court had, however, more serious repercussions on the democratic quality of elections, which was reflected in the 2009 breakdown of the democratic regime. The discussion of the results against the backdrop of prominent theories of court behaviour shows that the appointment rules and practices in place hampered in both countries the emergence of independent constitutional courts. Furthermore, both courts lacked public support and did not strategically build up a support base – which made them more vulnerable to political pressure. Moreover, the study showed that the relationship between the rule of law and elections is inextricable intertwined. However, this inextricability ultimately leads to a stagnating process in which courts impede electoral integrity and whereby contentious elections undermine assertive judicial decision making.Diese Dissertation ist die erste vergleichende Studie über die Rolle von afrikanischen Verfassungsgerichten bei Wahlen. Etwa zwanzig afrikanische Staaten haben im Zuge der dritten Welle der Demokratisierung Verfassungsgerichte eingeführt. Obwohl die Annahme weit verbreitet ist, dass Verfassungsgerichte einen demokratieförderlichen Einfluss auf politische Regime haben, gibt es kaum Studien zu den tatsächlichen Auswirkungen von Verfassungsgerichten auf die Demokratie. Außerdem fehlen Erkenntnisse über die Entwicklung afrikanischer Verfassungsgerichte und ihre Rolle in Demokratisierungsprozessen. Diese Studie untersucht den Einfluss von Verfassungsgerichten auf die Demokratie am Beispiel von Wahlklagen. Wahlen sind ein Kernelement von Demokratie und eignen sich daher besonders für diese Fragestellung. Damit leistet die Arbeit auch einen Beitrag zum Forschungsfeld der fairen Wahlen. In diesem Gebiet wurde die Bedeutung von Gerichten für demokratische Wahlen erkannt, aber der genaue Zusammenhang zwischen diesen beiden ist bisher weder theoretisch noch empirisch wenig erforscht. In dieser Dissertation werden die Verfassungsgerichte Madagaskars und Senegals mit Hilfe eines strukturiert-fokussiertem Vergleichs analysiert. Die Untersuchung ist durch die Fragestellung, wie Verfassungsgerichte zur demokratischen Qualität von Wahlen beitragen, geleitet. Ein für diese Dissertation neuentwickeltes Analyseraster erlaubt die Unterscheidung von funktionalen, ambivalenten und dysfunktionalen Einflüssen der Verfassungsgerichte auf die demokratische Qualität von Wahlen. Zudem wird das Konzept der demokratischen Qualität von Wahlen mit dem des Wahlzyklus‘ auf innovative Weise verbunden. Dadurch kann genau ausdifferenziert werden, welche der drei demokratischen Qualitäten von Wahlen (Partizipation, Wettbewerb und Legitimität) in welcher Weise für die sechs Schritte des Wahlzyklus relevant sind. Für die empirische Untersuchung wurde auf Grundlage von Feldforschungsdaten ein neuartiger Datensatz mit 274 Verfassungsgerichtsinterventionen erstellt. Die Analyse wurde mit Daten aus 78 Interviews mit Verfassungsrichtern, Juristen und Politikern sowie mit Sekundärquellen wie juristischen Kommentaren oder Wahlberichten ergänzt. Die Untersuchung zeigt, dass in beiden Ländern die drei demokratischen Qualitäten von Wahlen während des Untersuchungszeitraums behindert wurden. Die Analyse der Hauptinterventionen hat ergeben, dass die Verfassungsgerichte auf die Behinderungen von Wettbewerb und Legitimität mit hauptsächlich dysfunktionalen Interventionen reagiert haben. Die Interventionen des madagassischen Verfassungsgerichts hatten jedoch schwerwiegendere Auswirkungen auf die demokratische Qualität von Wahlen, was am Zusammenbruch der madagassischen Demokratie im Jahr 2009 deutlich wird. Die Diskussion der Ergebnisse im Licht prominenter Theorien zum Verhalten von Gerichten zeigt, dass die Ernennungsregeln für Verfassungsrichter sowie die Art und Weise, wie diese angewendet werden, das Entstehen von unabhängigen Verfassungsgerichten in beiden Ländern erschwert haben. Darüber hinaus verfügen die Gerichte über keine gesellschaftliche Unterstützung und sind daher verletzlicher gegenüber politischer Einflussnahme. Dies liegt auch daran, dass die Gerichte keine strategischen Bemühungen unternommen haben, um gesellschaftliches Vertrauen aufzubauen. Außerdem zeigt die Dissertation, dass Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Wahlen untrennbar miteinander verbunden sind. Diese enge Verflechtung führt zu einem stagnierenden Prozess, in dem Gerichte faire Wahlen erschweren und umstrittene Wahlen wiederum die Entwicklung einer unabhängigen Rechtsprechung hemmen

Opposing Power

Opposing Power argues that perceptions of regime vulnerability and mutual dependency by opposition elites shape the building of opposition alliances. When electoral autocracies are consistently dominant, opposition parties eschew fully fledged alliances. At best, they allocate only one candidate to contest against the incumbent in each subnational electoral district to avoid splitting the opposition vote. However, when multiple regime-debilitating events strike within a short period of time, thus pushing an incumbent to the precipice of power, opposition elites expect victory, accepting costly compromises to build alliances and seize power. Opposing Power shows how oppositions build these alliances through case study comparisons in East and Southeast Asia—between the Philippines and South Korea in the late 1980s, and between Malaysia and Singapore from 1965 to 2020

In Reckless Pursuit: Barry Goldwater A Team of Amateurs and the Rise of Conservatism

Before 1964, Barry Goldwater had never lost an election. In fact, despite being the underdog in both of his U.S. Senate elections in Arizona, in 1952 and 1958, he defied the odds and won. His keen ability for organization, fundraising and strategy was so widely respected that his Republican colleagues appointed the freshman senator to chair their campaign committee in 1955, with conservatives and liberals alike requesting his aid during contentious elections. Goldwater himself adamantly believed that in politics, “organization is the whole secret.” For all of these reasons, 1964 seems to be an outlier in the senator’s expansive career. The core qualities of detail, focus and organization present throughout his life were conspicuously absent during the 1964 presidential campaign. This thesis addresses the question of why Goldwater was unable to succeed in his quest for the presidency, focusing on the roles of ideology and organization. It is a common belief that Goldwater’s conservative ideology was the primary reason for his defeat, but this thesis instead argues that a lack of effective campaign strategy, coupled with poor organization and leadership, was responsible for Goldwater’s failed presidential bid. In strong contrast to his campaigns for the United States Senate, Goldwater demonstrated uncharacteristic reluctance to run in 1964, as well as an overdependence on individuals who were simply unqualified for a national campaign. The thesis explores these areas in both the primary and general election campaigns to argue that it was the lack of an effective campaign organization, not merely his political ideology, which led to Goldwater’s landslide loss. Research is based on a combination of contemporary media coverage of the campaign, memoirs of instrumental Goldwater aides, and archival documentation. Research was conducted using the collection of Personal & Political Papers of Barry M. Goldwater housed at the Hayden Library of Arizona State University, as well as the Goldwater Papers and the Papers of Congressman William E. Miller at Cornell University

Identity, discourse, and the impact of EU conditionality in the Western Balkans

Much of the scholarship on Europeanization has explained eastern enlargement according to the logics of materialism or constructivism. Materialists argue that candidates' compliance with conditionality demands is rooted in strong external material incentives and a credible shot at membership, while constructivists point to shared identities, norms and values. These are valuable insights, yet they do not address a critical missing element - how the dispersion of ideas influences institutional outcomes in candidate states. This research demonstrates that in order for the EU to have a transformative impact on the political institutions of the states of former Yugoslavia, national political leaders must be able to communicate a satisfying narrative of EU legitimacy that resonates with national narratives of legitimacy when justifying policy choices. The project goes beyond an analysis of compliant/non-compliant behavior to unearth a greater understanding of how, at the hour of accession, elite discourse operates as an agent to reshape histories, form new identities, and mold preferences. Together these processes have profound policy implications for the new regimes, as they lead to decisions that are consequential for institutional development at both the EU and state level. In particular, using a combination of content analysis and an original elite survey, this research finds that elites' ability to express power through ideas and over ideas can transform power in ideas for the cases of Croatia and Serbia/Kosovo. For Croatia, this entails elites creating conditions whereby the public believes in the idea that EU membership represents an 'escape' from the Balkans as opposed to a 'return' to Europe. For Serbia/Kosovo, elites strive to convince citizens that EU membership signifies a 're-branding' of the Balkan image rather than an escape. The Serbia-Kosovo territorial dispute figures prominently in the picture as it pits new ideas - a re-branded 'European' Serbia - against old ideas wherein the Kosovo narrative is essential to Serbian national identity. Serbian elites work to persuade EU and national publics that these ideas are not in tension and promise to deliver on both - attain EU membership and keep Kosovo

Guide to Options for ETD Programs

Dr. Martin Halbert of the University of North Texas documents the spectrum of ETD program implementation and offers guidance for academic decision-makers who are either creating or modifying ETD programs. Dr. Halbert identifies and offers in-depth analysis regarding the five key decisions that ETD programs must make. He also provides a literature review of publications, standards and reports that have been produced to date, and relates these to the key decisions