An index of assembly dissolution powers

Assembly dissolution is a key dimension of constitutional variation in parlia- mentary democracies. It conditions the timing of elections, influences electoral accountability, and shapes how politicians bargain about government formation, termination, and policy. Yet, despite the importance of dissolution rules, no mea- sure exists that applies to the different actors involved in dissolutions and records the complexity of the rules sufficiently accurately to capture their substantive im- plications. This paper develops, operationalizes and tests a detailed index of parlia- mentary dissolution powers that generalizes to all relevant actors. We demonstrate the substantive utility of the index by examining how election timing powers mod- ify electoral accountability

Three essays on floor debate in American deliberative bodies.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Rochester. Department of Political Science, 2017. "Chapter 2 was written with Max Goplerud: the paper was conceived in unison and data were gathered in partnership. Goplerud provided editorial assistance but the remainder of Chapter 2 is the work of the student."--Page xi.This dissertation project examines an understudied aspect of legislative behavior: participation in floor speech in deliberative bodies. The first chapter looks at the effect of ideology on delegate participation at the Federal Convention of 1787. Using an original dataset of delegate speeches at the Convention, I show that participation at the Convention was dominated by ideological extremists. Therefore, claims made about the intent of the writers of the Constitution based on Convention records are biased in favor of ideologically extreme Convention delegates, as extreme delegates were more likely to be recorded. The second and third chapters focus on floor debate in the U.S. House of Representatives. Floor speech makes up the majority of the official daily journals of Congress, yet it is severely understudied compared to other types of legislative behavior. Using a new dataset of all House speeches from 1873 to 2011, Max Goplerud and I conduct the first systematic analysis of member participation in floor debate in the House over time. This is a significant improvement over previous work on congressional floor speech in both scope and breadth. We find that increased ideological distance between members and the chamber median, being committee or party leader, and increased seniority, all significantly increase the number of speeches House members make in a given Congress. We also find that being electorally vulnerable, being a member of a more homogeneous party, and being older when starting congressional service, all decrease the number of floor speeches delivered by members in the House. Finally, we show the importance of de-aggregating speech data to look at how different factors matter more or less over time. The third chapter examines the effect of institutional rule changes on member participation in floor debates in the U.S. House. I show that changes to procedural rules change the number of speeches members make on the floor. Additionally, I find that members of the minority party, more senior members, and ideological extremists are more likely to have their speech patterns impacted by rule changes than committee leaders and electorally vulnerable members

New systems of care for substance use disorders: treatment, finance, and technology under health care reform

This article outlined ways in which persons with addiction are currently underserved by our current health care system. However, with the coming broad scale reforms to our health care system, the access to and availability of high-quality care for substance use disorders will increase. Addiction treatments will continue to be offered through traditional substance abuse care systems, but these will be more integrated with primary care, and less separated as treatment facilities leverage opportunities to blend services, financing mechanisms, and health information systems under federally driven incentive programs. To further these reforms, vigilance will be needed by consumers, clinicians, and policy makers to assure that the unmet treatment needs of individuals with addiction are addressed. Embedded in this article are essential recommendations to facilitate the improvement of care for substance use disorders under health care reform. Ultimately, as addiction care acquires more of the look and feel of mainstream medicine, it is important to be mindful of preexisting trends in health care delivery overall that are reflected in recent health reform legislation. Within the world of addiction care, clinicians must move beyond their self-imposed stigmatization and sequestration of specialty addiction treatment. The problem for addiction care, as it becomes more mainstream, is to not comfortably feel that general slogans like Treatment Works, as promoted by Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration\u27s Center for Substance Abuse Treatment during its annual Recovery Month celebrations, will meet the expectations of stakeholders outside the specialty addiction treatment community. Rather, the problem is to show exactly how addiction treatment works, and to what extent it works-there have to be metrics showing changes in symptom level or functional outcome, changes in health care utilization, improvements in workplace attendance and productivity, or other measures. At minimum, clinicians will be required to demonstrate that their new systems of care and future clinical activity are in conformance with overall standards of best practice in health care

The Recall in France: A long standing and unresolved debate

International audienc