Closing The Door: A Roll Call Analysis of Immigration Voting in the 99th and 104th Congresses

The research focus of this study is the voting behavior of the elected members of the United States House of Representatives on the issue of national immigration. This work specifically focuses on selected immigration roll call votes taken during the 99th and 104th Congresses. An examination of the voting behavior of the 435 elected representatives from each year will be examined by considering eight hypotheses that question the immigration voting behavior of various sub groups within congress. During the 1980s and 1990s Congress took several major legislative actions in regards to the issue of national immigration. It was hypothesized that not only the tone, but the voting manner of the United States House of Representatives, has become more restrictive on immigration issues during that period. In examining the results of the hypothesis a clear distinction between the voting behavior of the House in 1986, and the voting behavior of the House in 1996 became apparent. Also, the Republican party has clearly become more supportive of greater immigration controls, whereas their Democrat counterparts have remained constant in their support for less restrictive immigration policies. In a final analysis of the two Houses a pattern of polarization in immigration voting was evident, with the majority of movement being towards the more restrictive end of the scale. In conclusion it was found that support for more restrictive immigration policies has grown between the 99th Congress and the 104th Congress, and that this support has not been confined solely to the Republican party. It was also found that immigration has become a more divisive issue, both within the two parties and within the House overall. A more conservative viewpoint on immigration is now the norm in the United States House of Representatives

Closing The Door: A Roll Call Analysis of Immigration Voting in the 99th and 104th Congresses

The research focus of this study is the voting behavior of the elected members of the United States House of Representatives on the issue of national immigration. This work specifically focuses on selected immigration roll call votes taken during the 99th and 104th Congresses. An examination of the voting behavior of the 435 elected representatives from each year will be examined by considering eight hypotheses that question the immigration voting behavior of various sub groups within congress. During the 1980s and 1990s Congress took several major legislative actions in regards to the issue of national immigration. It was hypothesized that not only the tone, but the voting manner of the United States House of Representatives, has become more restrictive on immigration issues during that period. In examining the results of the hypothesis a clear distinction between the voting behavior of the House in 1986, and the voting behavior of the House in 1996 became apparent. Also, the Republican party has clearly become more supportive of greater immigration controls, whereas their Democrat counterparts have remained constant in their support for less restrictive immigration policies. In a final analysis of the two Houses a pattern of polarization in immigration voting was evident, with the majority of movement being towards the more restrictive end of the scale. In conclusion it was found that support for more restrictive immigration policies has grown between the 99th Congress and the 104th Congress, and that this support has not been confined solely to the Republican party. It was also found that immigration has become a more divisive issue, both within the two parties and within the House overall. A more conservative viewpoint on immigration is now the norm in the United States House of Representatives

Nationalism and national identity in Scottish politics

Scotland has long been a nation within a wider state, but only within the last four decades has a political party dedicated to the establishment of a Scottish state emerged as an electoral force. Yet, since that time the political landscape within the United Kingdom has changed rapidly. While some see devolution as a step towards the separation of Scotland from the United Kingdom, others argue it is a strengthening of that relationship. This thesis argues that only by acknowledging the ethnic and mass influences on the nature of Scottish national identity will an understanding of Scottish nationalism be possible. After considering the theoretical arguments surrounding nationalism, and specifically Scottish nationalism, the work shifts to an empirical analysis of Scotland. To examine the nature of Scottish nationalism and national identity, this research considers the manifestos of the political parties over the past thirty-five years, examining how they have employed a sense of Scotland the nation, and Scottishness. This consideration is then linked to an analysis of mass perceptions of national belonging and identity, which are themselves contrasted with elite perceptions, gleaned through interviews conducted amongst MPs and MSPs. The results indicate the need to recognise that ethnic aspects of Scottish national identity are more significant than the foremost theoretical considerations of nationalism and national identity allow. Furthermore, this case study illustrates that the impact that mass perceptions have on national identity also requires greater recognition within the field

Scottish independence:what does the diaspora think?

Scottish independence is a matter for debate, not only in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK, but also in the Scottish diaspora. Their views have rarely been sought, yet they will have a view on the constitutional future of their homeland. This paper draws on research on attitudes to independence within the diaspora, and concludes that individuals in North America generally favour independence more than those in England. But attitudes are changing, partly because of Brexit, and partly related to the UK Conservative government, which is seen as not reflecting Scottish views and values. Independence is now considered more positively

Exploring the impact of the ‘RUEU?’ game on Greek students’ perceptions of and attitudes to European identity

European identity is a complex, multi-faced and inherently imprecise concept relating to a range of socio-political and psychological factors. Addressing this topic in educational practice, particularly with respect to Higher Education students, constitutes a complex and open problem for research. This paper reports on an experimental study designed to explore the effectiveness of the educational game “RUEU?” in supporting university students in understanding the key socio-political issues regarding European identity. Quantitative data regarding Greek university students’ (N = 92) attitudes to European identity, before and after playing the game, were collected. Students’ performance of the game group (N = 46) was compared with that of a control group (N = 46) who explored the same issues about European identity through a tutor-guided discussion. The findings showed that both instructional interventions were effective but in different ways. The participants in the game-based group appeared more attached to the EU after the intervention and moved toward a more balanced description of their Greek and European identity. On the other hand, the students in the control group rated higher what “European identity” and being EU citizen means to them. The findings indicated the potential of game-based interventions to deliver not only academic content but also to promote students’ reflection and influence them at an attitudinal and emotional level

The Iowa Homemaker vol.9, no.1

The Eternal Subject by Isabel Leith, page 1 Japanese Life by Ruth Dean, page 2 Ready or Never Ready? by Margaret Davidson, page 3 Get Those Germs by Ruth Stewart, page 3 Veishea by Margaret Marnette, page 4 Built-in Features, page 5 4-H Club by Florence Forbes, page 6 State Association by Marcia E. Turner, page 8 Plea of the Dishrag, page 10 Editorial, page 11 Alumnae News by Vera Caulum, page 1

Wet Paint: Visual Culture in a Changing Britain – A Round Table Debate

Political decisions and debates regarding the interregional and interna- tional partnerships that constitute Great Britain, including those over Scottish Independence, EVEL (English Votes for English Laws) and proposed legislation on an ‘in/out’ referendum on British membership of the European Union, have contributed to, and intensified, the examination of Britain’s institutions, as well as its national emblems and arche- types. In light of such a dynamic situation, Visual Culture in Britain has asked representatives of British universities, the museum sector and research centres to respond to the idea of a changing Britain through the prism of British art and visual culture, using cogent examples wherever possible, and to outline their observations, understandings and positions within this rapidly developing context