This study examines the factors that shape the timing of a passage of a piece of controversial gender equality legislation by conducting a case study of the abolition of the family-head system in South Korea. This study draws on the method of process tracing with the data collected from the archives and the interviews. The case study mainly compares the legislative processes for the bills on the abolition of the family-head system in 16th and the 17th National Assemblies, in which the bills resulted to opposite outcomes.

This study argues that the institutions of the legislative process mediate the impact of relevant actors for gender equality policymaking. In the bill initiation stage, only a small number of the elected officials are required to introduce a bill, and women representatives serve a vital role as they are more likely to introduce feminist bills than their male colleagues. This study argues that 1) the background of the women influencing their commitment to feminist agendas, 2) strong women’s movements contributing to issue saliency, and thereby the policy priorities of the issue, and 3) the resources and constraints inside the party for feminist policymaking influenced by party ideology, shape how active women representatives will be in advocating controversial gender equality agendas.

In the later stages of policymaking, the efforts of a small number of women members are offset by that of political parties. Emphasizing the positive agenda control of the majority party and the negative agenda control of the minority parties, this study suggests that party issue positions are critical for the outcome of the bill. To explain the party issue position (re)shape, this study underlines 1) public opinion, 2) the emergence of new voter groups leading to the decline of the cleavage politics, 3) new party entry, and 4) women in the party and the party leadership. The findings highlight that the major parties’ issue positions shift in the 17th National Assembly greatly contributed to amplifying the bargaining power of the key allies and weakening the institutional leverage of the opponents, leading to the successful legislation of the bill.

Social media is explosively popular in discussing socio-political issues. This work provides a preliminary study on how polarization occurs online. Chapter I begins by introducing limitations of the internet in maintaining a free flow of information. Not only do users seek out groups of like-minded individuals and insulate themselves from opposing views, social media platforms algorithmically curate content such that it will be in line with a user’s preconceived notions of the world. The work then defines polarization and carefully discusses its most prominent causes. It then shifts focus to analyze a closely-related issue regarding political discourse: outrage, which is both a noticeable effect of and further cause of polarization. It is clearly prevalent in traditional media, but for completion, I provide a case study to measure its incidence in social media. In Chapter II, I scrutinize the language used in the #MeToo movement on Twitter and draw conclusions about the issues Twitter users focus on and how they express their views. This chapter details the method I used, the challenges I faced in designing the exploratory study, and the results I found. I benchmark patterns I find in the Twitterverse against those I find in The Wall Street Journal. The analysis relies upon the metric of word similarity, based on proximity of and frequency of words used together, to make distinctions about what users are most commonly saying with respect to given topics, or keywords. Chapter III closes the essay with conclusions of socio-political polarization, discourse, and outrage in social media. Finally, the essay outlines potential channels for future work.

In this paper, I will be arguing for the adoption of compulsory voting legislation in the United States. More specifically, for the implementation of compulsory voting in all federal elections. I begin my paper by stating essential democratic principles and how they demand this kind of voting policy in a country that prides itself as a beacon of democracy. Secondly, I will discussing voter suppression in the United States, both in the past as well as currently. My goal with this section is to show how compulsory voting would reduce voter suppression and bring about a democratically legitimate elected government. Thirdly, I will discuss how countries across the globe have already implemented compulsory voting in their elections. Primarily, I will show how Australia and Brazil require voting in their elections, as they are the most similar in size and culture to the United States out of the nations that currently operate with it. Lastly, I will refute any arguments against compulsory voting and argue why it is imperative for the United States to implement it in their elections.

This study aims to understand stereotypes, misconceptions, and generalizations about government employees and their jobs. The study specifically looked at the City of Prescott and involved an online survey sent to City of Prescott employees concerning stereotypes, generalizations, and misconceptions about the employees and their jobs. The questions were also designed to ask the employees about the accurateness of the stereotypes, misconceptions, and generalizations and if they affect the employees and how they feel about their employment. Researching stereotypes about City of Prescott employees and how the stereotypes make the employees feel about their jobs and employment can not only give insight into organizational morale and why people choose to work for a government entity, but it can also help to understand where stereotypes come from and how to combat them. The survey was sent to all City of Prescott employees, and 101 responses were received. Results show that an overwhelming majority of respondents are aware of stereotypes, misconceptions, and generalizations about them and their jobs. The respondents also identified specific stereotypes, misconceptions, and generalizations that they know of or have heard. However, for the most part they do not appear to negatively affect the employees. Additionally, the employees that participated do not generally perceive the stereotypes and generalizations to be very accurate in describing their jobs and responsibilities. The employees also identified some ways that their employer can combat generalizations and stereotypes. The findings from this study will be shared with the City of Prescott to help them understand stereotypes, misconceptions, and generalizations about their employees and jobs.

In this paper, I defend the Electoral College system used to elect the President of the United States against criticisms that the system should be more democratic. I first take a look at federal republican theory and the contemporary issues which influenced and persuaded the Founding Fathers to adopt this theory \u2014 not only as the foundation of the presidential election system, but also as the foundation of the United States Constitution. I describe that the purpose of federal republicanism is to ensure that power is distributed such that no group of people is too powerful to oppress others. I then provide a basic description of the Electoral College and demonstrate how the system is not purely democratic. From here, I defend the Electoral College's partially undemocratic nature on the grounds that state representation is a fundamental part of federal republicanism. I subsequently address four issues alleged by critics concerning the Electoral College: discouraged voter participation, unrepresented state minorities, the creation of battleground states and safe states, and the entrenchment of the two-party system. With respect to discouraged voter participation, I argue that the issue is not unique to the Electoral College system. With respect to unrepresented state minorities, I argue that if states distribute College electors proportionally to give state minorities representation, it would strengthen national interests at the expense of state interests and hurt the federal system of government. With respect to battleground states and safe states, I argue that they do not cause presidential candidates to ignore voters any more than under a national popular vote system. And, with respect to the two- party system, I argue that it does little harm to representation because the Democratic and Republican parties are internally diverse. Finally, I use federal republican theory to challenge the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) \u2014 a purely democratic solution to reform the Electoral College without Constitutional amendment \u2014 on the grounds that it would throw away state representation, eliminate the federal aspect of the election system, and face legal controversy.

In this paper I conduct a comparative analysis of how proportional representation electoral systems could affect the political representation of racial and ethnic minorities if adopted in America. In order to do this I first discuss the central ideas of proportional representation in conjunction with a historical and contemporary view of the American electoral system. Using this discussion as a basic framework I enter a more in depth discussion about the pros and cons of PR systems, especially in so far as party lists, district magnitude, and links between constituent and representative. To better contextualize the American electoral system I then use case studies featuring New Zealand, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, and Germany. These case studies discuss important aspects of each country's electoral system and how they have affected ethnic and racial minorities within those countries. Each case study concludes with an assessment of how a similar system might work if adopted in America which aims to inform a broader discussion about electoral reform. Finally I conclude with a discussion of my findings that recognizes how proportional representation systems open new pathways for minority representation, while still urging caution in viewing those systems as a straightforward solution to the chronic underrepresentation of America's ethnic and racial minorities in politics.

In 2016, the Western world was shocked by the victory of the "Leave" campaign in the referendum on European Union membership in Great Britain and by the victory of Donald Trump in the United States' presidential election. These two electoral successes have been called "populist" campaigns in their respective countries. In this paper, I ask whether the widespread populist sentiment in the United States and Great Britain qualifies as "populist" and should be regarded as part of the same movement. I then explore whether Trump and Leave voters are motivated by a common issue or set of issues. Initially, I frame my argument by defining populism and showing how both campaigns meet the definition. Next, I compare the Leave campaign with the Trump campaign and explore the similarities and differences in the demographics and opinions of their supporters. I determine that while the Trump and Leave campaigns certainly have differences, they should ultimately be treated as two branches of the same movement. Finally, I conclude that both campaigns are more motivated by versions of cultural resentment than economic anxiety.

In this essay, I discuss Islamic feminism from the point of view of its proponents. By this, I hope to engage Muslims and traditionalists. Islamic feminism is the fight for gender equality, as a challenge to the way traditional Islam has perpetuated patriarchal power structures in the Muslim world. Today, feminist sentiment is on the rise in the Islamic world as more and more women are becoming engaged in this fight for gender equality. Islamic feminism reclaims the Quran as its justification and involves the struggle for gender equality grounded in this justification. I divulge into two linked claims: a normative one where gender equality is justified in Islam, and a descriptive one which posits that male domination over interpretive powers has distorted the way Islam has been practiced traditionally, thus placing women in a disadvantaged position. Islamic feminists, I have found, seek to reject the widespread patriarchal interpretation of the Quran by first, reinterpreting the Quran as an equalizing force, and then implementing Islamic feminism in the public sphere. I show that they do this by engaging politically and civically through activism, education, and political involvement — this I refer to as civic Islam, highlighting that public engagement is an inherent Islamic duty. For this end, I cite several countries — including Iran, Yemen, Tunisia — in which Islamic feminists have taken up the mantle as activists, and what their impact has been through brief case studies. In the end, I include my reflection on Islamic feminism as a college-educated Muslim woman having grown up in a Western, liberal society.

This publication addresses the development of civic engagement programs in the past few decades. While successful in increasing what was perceived as a serious lack of civic engagement among youth, the movement has failed to address a key aspect of civic engagement: political engagement. Although trends have shown that the youth are much more interested in alternative forms of engagement, it is important for the success of democracy and sustaining political structures that the youth are given tools to become engaged in traditional forms of government. This paper, by analyzing data from various academic papers, will look into successful policy initiatives to increase political engagement at universities. Furthermore, the paper will look into current programs at Arizona State University (ASU) based on a criterion created from the academic resources to gauge ASU's standings. The paper will conclude with a proposal for a future ASU program. The program will be an expansion of the current ASU Experience course required of freshmen to implement a political engagement preparatory curriculum.

This paper elaborates on the considerations of organizing a democratic deliberation. It addresses issues of topic, length, defining consensus, and how to effectively translate deliberative theory into a concrete, results-producing event. The paper presents this information in the context of the body of academic work on deliberation plus the author's own experience organizing two successful deliberative events.