top color bar
CAPPP Logo
University of Washington
CAPPP News!  

CAPPP Talks

Nathan Collins, Stanford University

Date and Time: Friday March 5, 12-1:30 Smith 40 A

Turnout dynamics have been a topic of interest since the 1960s, when a decline in voter turnout caused concern among political scientists and led to a number of possible explanations, including decreased partisanship, civic disengagement, and, following on the observation that young citizens vote at lower rates, changes in the age distribution as the baby boom generation came of age. Despite the fact voter turnout dynamics over time is an inherently dynamical matter, no one has pursued a dynamical model of turnout. I present such a model based on Herbert Simon's satisficing concept, in which individuals change their turnout decisions only when they become dissatisfied with their current decisions. I show that this model explains post-WWII aggregate turnout trends in six countries around the world. I also describe recent efforts to extend the model to allow for endogeneous vote choice, which the original model does not allow, as well as efforts to use a similar model to study voter registration trends.

Eric Patashnik, University of Virginia

Date and Time: Friday April 20, 12-1:30 Smith 40 A

Reforms at Risk: What Happens After Major Policy Changes Are Enacted

In this book project, I examine what happens to sweeping and seemingly successful policy reforms after they are passed. Most studies focus on the politics of reform adoption, yet the political struggle does not end when major reforms become enacted. Why do certain general-interest reforms endure while others are quietly reversed or eroded away? I use a small N, comparative case approach to analyze the structural and constituency factors that enable reform measures to survive. Cases include taxation, agricultural subsidies, airline deregulation, emissions trading, pension regulation health insurance, and reform of government procurement. My analysis demonstrates that sustainable reforms do more than destroy an existing policy subsystem or upset a stable equilibrium. They create positive policy feedbacks, transform institutions, and often unleash the creative destructiveness of market forces, reconfiguring the political dynamic.

 

 
University of Washington