Name: Michael Catalano
Section: State and Local Politics
Professional Email: [email protected]
Professional Status: Graduate Student
Institution: SUNY Binghamton
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info: Matthew Walz, SUNY Binghamton, [email protected]
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Fusion Voting in New York: Trading Votes for Policy between Political Parties
Abstract:
Fusion voting is a unique electoral institution prohibited by most US states but exercised in a remaining few, most notably in New York. Yet few empirical studies have considered why we see major and minor political parties cooperating through cross-endorsements of candidates. We argue that minor parties offer cross-endorsements (and extra votes) to major party candidates in exchange for policy concessions from major parties and their candidates, particularly where races are competitive. To test this theory, we examine the effects of fusion voting on the roll-call voting records of US House members in the state of New York in relation to House members from non-fusion voting states from 1952-2014. We find that minor party cross-endorsements appear to impact voting records of both Republican and Democratic Congressional delegations from New York, with changing directions of legislative behavior based on the position of the cross-endorsing minor party in relation to the major party whose candidate is being cross-endorsed.

Name: Toby Irving
Section: State and Local Politics
Professional Email: [email protected]
Professional Status: Graduate Student
Institution: CUNY Graduate Center
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Political Maps and Police Accountability in New York City
Abstract:
In Summer 2020, calls to defund police landed on the front steps of the New York City Council as they approved a budget. While many significant policy areas impacting the City’s most vulnerable, namely housing regulations, are controlled by the State government, the NYPD is a City agency known for the strength of its union and lack of public accountability. Using GIS mapping in conversation with political records, I suggest that the ways in which police precincts overlap with City Council districts contribute to lack of police accountability by elected officials, and thus the public. Some of the most powerful actors in the City Council represent districts covered by six different police precincts, which reinforces the flawed problem-solving processes at the leadership-level and makes impossible precinct-level accountability and change. I suggest that further network analysis should be done regarding the relationships that exist at various geographic and political levels, and potential comparative work to other local models of police accountability.

Name: Jessica Koyner
Section: State and Local Politics
Professional Email: [email protected]
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Weston High School
Scheduling Preference: Friday Afternoon
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Gen-Z Political Participation
Abstract:
Gen-Z is growing up in a time of political turmoil. Starting with 9/11, the 2008 recession, COVID, calls for racial justice, and the 2020 presidential election, Gen-Z certainly went through many world events before they turned the legal drinking age. Despite all the political turnoffs, Gen-Z is remarkably civically engaged. Gen-Z is also the most left generatio Social media has certainly played a role, but also education as Gen-Zers are on the track to have the most college grads of any other generation. Gen Z in America is the most racially diverse generation as well. But how does Gen-Z fare in local politics? Many small towns have reported an uptick in civic participation from high schoolers and college students. What has driven Gen-Z to participate especially in local politics?

Name: jeffrey kraus
Section: American Politics
Professional Email: [email protected]
Professional Status: Administrator
Institution: Wagner College
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Health Policy in the Empire State: Is the Affordable Care Act affordable?, *Jeffrey Fred Kraus
Abstract:
Notwithstanding Joe Biden's overwhelming victory in New York state, President Trump increased the vote for a Republican presidential candidate in Latino neighborhoods of New York. Trump's vote total was higher in the south Bronx and east Harlem, and Biden's share of the vote in these communities was lower than Clinton's total in 2016. This result, along with Republican inroads in Miami and border areas of Texas, suggests that the Democratic Party's message is not resonating with this community. In this paper, I will discuss whether this is the beginning of a long-term trend or an aberration.

Name: Robert Pecorella
Section: State and Local Politics
Professional Email: [email protected]
Professional Status: Associate Professor
Institution: St. John's University
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title: N/A
Panel Description:
Co-author info: None
Co-presenter info: None
Paper Title: Property Rights, State Police Powers, and the Takings Clause: the Evolution toward Dysfunctional Land-Use Management.
Abstract:
This proposed paper focuses on an interdisciplinary research approach to urban regime analysis. It begins by unpacking several terms. Urban regime analysis is best characterized as an approach to urban politics that emphasizes both formal and informal group interactions within a particular governing regime characterized by the existence of systemic power. As defined by Clarence Stone, “systemic power is that dimension of power in which durable features of the socioeconomic system (the situational element) confer advantages and disadvantages on groups (the intergroup element) in ways predisposing public officials to favor some interests at the expense of others (the indirect element)” (Stone 1980: p. 980). In his analysis Davies (2002) points out the inherent tensions between government autonomy and structuralism in the regime approach since “it is concerned specifically with how the dialectic between market control of production and popular control of government affects political action in US cities (2002: p. 2). This paper argues that assessing the balance between market and popular control of local governance within an approach that privileges the market, i.e., systemic power, but acknowledges the potential impact of political activism, i.e., group politics, does not lend itself to any one disciplinary approach. Achieving a more complete understanding of regime politics requires an interdisciplinary approach grounded in “a process of answering a question, solving a problem, or addressing a topic that is too broad and complex to be dealt with by a single discipline or profession” (Klein & Newell, 1997, p. 393). Such an interdisciplinary analysis of a complex system like that represented by urban regimes requires finding the common ground from which a variety of disciplinary scholars can integrate their insights (Repko, 2012, pp. 56-57). Researchers from different disciplines must communicate with each other in ways that maintain disciplinary integrity while permitting cross-disciplinary interactions. Such efforts at cross-disciplinary cooperation involve “social interaction where two individuals enter into each other’s frame of reference, attempt to discuss a problem, try to identify sources of disagreement concerning it, and arrive jointly at a resolution of it” (Repko & Szostak, 2017, p. 271). The main part of the paper suggests an interdisciplinary research model for how political science, sociology, and history can provide an integrated analysis of the operations of urban regimes. The paper employs a “field of consciousness” methodological approach to integrate the work of these three disciplines in situating urban regimes on some common analytical ground allowing for an truly integrative interdisciplinary analysis (Arvidson, 2014). It represents a “new attitude that is just beginning to become less rare: namely, that a focal phenomenon is never presented as isolated from its context, it is presented within a sphere of relevance that must also be articulated in order to accurately describe the phenomenon” (Arvidson, 1998, p. 51). From this more nuanced perspective “attention is best thought of as a heterarchy, not a hierarchy,” meaning “that the context of focal attention and focal attention itself may be presented together and affect each other” (Arvidson, 1998, p. 58).

Name: Brian Williams
Section: State and Local Politics
Professional Email: [email protected]
Professional Status: Assistant Professor
Institution: SUNY Cortland
Scheduling Preference: Friday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Direct Democracy and Voter Turnout at the County Level: The Case of Florida
Abstract:
Paper topic – This study focuses on the relationship between direct democracy (referenda, in particular) and voter turnout, using county-level data from the 2006-2020 general elections in the State of Florida. While previous studies have evaluated the relationship between direct democracy and voter turnout at the state level in the US, this is the first (to my knowledge) to address this question at the county level. Methods – OLS regression models are used to analyze a new county-level panel dataset from the State of Florida. The outcome variable is voter turnout as a percentage of registered voters in each county. The explanatory variables of interest are the total number of referenda on the ballot, as well as more specific variables indicating the total number of referenda addressing fiscal, social, and institutional issues. Preliminary findings - Previous results of the study, using data from the 2006-2016 general elections, showed that county referenda dealing with fiscal issues increase voter turnout during presidential elections. In this update, I add data from the 2018 and 2020 general elections and re-evaluate the results. Thus, the updated dataset will include data four midterm and four presidential elections.