Name: Zayn Aga
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: zaynaga1@gmail.com
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Syracuse university
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Afternoon
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title: President Donald Trump and The First Amendment in a digital age.
Panel Description: Make a case for the fact that, President Donald Trump by blocking people on twitter has violated the First Amendment.
Co-author info: Not Applicable
Co-presenter info: Zebediah Sulmasy, (research assistant), Green Mountain Collage, zebsulmasy@gmail.com
Paper Title:  Yes, No, Maybe So: Problems in Political Polling
Abstract:
Yes, No, Maybe So: The Problems With Political Polling in America “Math and Science bring men together, politics tears them apart”. -Thomas Hobbes Politics dividing Americans is no new advancement, but the way the fourth estate deals with politics has taken on a new brutality as a twenty-first century bloodsport. Americans have been increasingly divided and media is one of the largest factors in that division. This danger emerges when media begins to evaluate the state not as a democracy or as a government but as a sport. This emerging style can be seen quite easily when taking into account partisan bias media— the Cable News Network (CNN) is a great example of this sportsmanship. Jeff Zucker, who made a name for himself creating shows like Fear Factor, The Apprentice, and Pardon the Interruption, is the current president of the network. He has said in the past “the idea that politics is [a] sport is undeniable, and we understood that and approached it that way”. His words are very reflective of reality-- much of CNN’s news programming, debates and elections are framed in the exact same context as a sporting event like a boxing match or soccer game. When watching a sport the most important thing to understand is how to determine the score. In politics, people equate polls to the score. Conflating these two is incredibly dangerous for our democracy, as the fourth estate is now dealing with an epidemic of analysts giving mediocre interpretations of bad polling data

Name: Higerta Bali
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: melibregu@hotmail.it
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: faculty of history and philology
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Morning
Proposal Type: Roundtable
Panel Title:  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE MIDDLE EAST XXI.
Panel Description:
Co-author info: Prof. Meljana Bregu, melibregu@hotmail.it
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE MIDDLE EAST XXI.
Abstract:
In this project we will address one of the most important but more difficult topics in the field of international relations, that of the United States leadership in the global political system in a world whose systemic system appears to be, sooner or later, will change. Nowadays, predictions about the fall of American power are widespread. The 2008 economic crisis, combined with the continued economic growth of China, India and Russia, as well as the further enlargement of the European Union, seems to be bringing about irreversible change in terms of the global economic power and the structure of the system today's international relations. The US from the isolationist and neutral politics that had characterized it since its foundation until the end of the nineteenth century in an internationalist, its international engagement and leadership in the international arena, which began in the last decade of the nineteenth century, with World War I, World War II, and then with economic aid and interference all over the world. The work for the preparation of this research paper consisted in the overlay of materials and data through numerous writings, studies, newspaper articles, reports of various international instuctions, materials obtained from the internet. Exploitation literature has been largely in Albanian and English. Much of the work has been built on the study of various books written by the most authoritative authors of the USA. The empirical analysis has been extended to the main indicators of the degree of strength of United States of America. Various variables have been attempted to maintain the same approach and comparative approach by making theoretical illustration work more credible. The analysis I made of events and real facts in the international developments of the twentieth century and in the first decade of the 21st century convinced me that the basic research hypothesis of this study receives an affirmative answer, which means that the United States is and will continue to remain for a foreseeable future, the only country that can truly assume the responsibilities and leadership to maintain peace, security and stability in the world, in the conditions of the old and new threats that threaten these the global public good. With the logic and the current and expected pace of development, there is still no serious indication that America will have serious rivals that would endanger its status as the hegemonic power of the globe and, consequently, its role of global leadership.

Name: Geoffrey Broadbent
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: broadbgp15@bonaventure.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: St. Bonaventure University
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  The Great American Rip-Off? A Look at the Paradoxical Nature of US Healthcare
Abstract:
A paradox exists within the United States healthcare system. We spend more than any other developed nation on health, but we have poorer health outcomes than similar nations. Oftentimes the structure of our system is deemed inefficient and incapable of providing quality care. Canada is used to justify this explanation, as their healthcare system is a single-payer system that provides quality care at a significantly lower cost. However, Germany also has multi-payer system and performs better on measures of population health. Universal access to healthcare is a glaring discrepancy between the United States healthcare system and those in place in Canada and Germany, but with the passage of the Affordable Care Act and nearly 20 million Americans gaining health insurance there has been little improvement on measurable health outcomes. Finally, while healthcare costs have continued to balloon over the past decade, spending on social welfare programs has stagnated. It is possible that poor housing, employment, and nutrition is responsible for the seemingly poor performance of the American healthcare system, leading to my preliminary hypothesis that levels of social spending explains variation in health outcomes. This research is different from previous research examining a link between health outcomes and social expenditures because it includes analysis of quality of care measures ensuring that discrepancies in health outcomes among the cases is not influenced by poor care. Initially, a qualitative analysis utilizing descriptive statistics will be performed using most similar system logic. Data from the most recent OECD and WHO reports is compiled for 2015. Health outcomes are measured through the traditional population health standards life expectancy, infant mortality, maternal mortality, and potential life years lost. Health expenditure will be represented as a percent of GDP per capita and included both public and private spending on acute and preventative care. Social expenditures is measured similarly to health expenditures as a percent of GDP per capita and including both public and private spending. Quality of care is measured by looking at available resources in terms of human capital as well as medical technology combined with measures for patient satisfaction and utilization of care. My preliminary findings show that while the United States does spend significantly more on healthcare than Canada and Germany, the same cannot be said for social expenditures. Germany far outspends, but Canada is similar to the United States. However, a look at the ratio of health to social expenditures in the United States shows a noteworthy imbalance not seen in Germany or Canada. Study of quality of care measures confirms that participants in the American healthcare system are receiving comparable levels of care to those in the Canadian and German systems suggesting that perhaps disproportionate spending on healthcare instead of social welfare programs is causing lower health outcomes for Americans. Based on the results of the qualitative analysis, the preliminary hypothesis may be adjusted and then tested using regression analysis. The same measures will be used for this analysis and will be run using data from all OECD members.

Name: Israel Chora
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: Israelchora@ucsb.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: University of California Santa Barbara
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  The Majority-Minority State: An Examination of Latinx Political Engagement
Abstract:
The Latinx population is the largest ethnic group in California (Pew Research Center, 2014). This population experiences low educational attainment and earned income (Gutierrez and Zavalla, 2009). These inequalities have a negative effect on civic engagement and political efficacy (Brady, Verba Schlozman, 1995). This paper explores how material inequality, parental socialization and resources such as available time, affect Latinx youth civic engagement. To investigate this phenomenon we conducted an in-person survey targeting youth in the Santa Barbara-Isla Vista areas. Preliminary results show that material inequality and parental socialization are key to understanding low Latinx political engagement.

Name: Jean-François Clouzet
Section: Public Policy & Public Administration
Professional Email: jfclouzetihedn@gmail.com
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: University of Geneva
Scheduling Preference: Friday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  ‘’Grand Genève : a new security complex’’.
Abstract:
The aim of this paper is to study special features of the security cross-bord coopération in the case of a crossborder metropolis : Big Geneva. Based on the methodological framework of action research, and registered in the theoretical framework of the critical security studies , this paper defends the hypothesis that it is only from moment where the Metropolis is seen as a political object, that its vulnerability and its answer of security becomes one. Big Geneva Metropolis becomes, presently, a security complex (Buzan, 1998). The cross-border security allows us to have a laboratory where the governance of security and crisis reconstruct itself in a constant way. The french-genevan cross- border security space build up under a construction process in which the actors on the ground and their hierarchies play a leading role. Currently, there isn’t any political strategy fully established to build the region as the space of specific security. The french-genevan cross-border cooperation regarding security always followed singular paths as far as she remained a prisoner of the systems of sovereignty of nation- states. Nevertheless, ‘’Big Geneva’’ metropolis deals with a settled international criminality and specific issues. From this perspective, the metropolis has to value its networking to answer the specific stakes of this settled international criminality. The territory is approached under a specific angle: the metropolitan agglomeration as autonomous territory requiring one particular need of security with regard to the zone border control zone. PhD candidate and in charge of the project ‘’ organe de sécurité CEVA - LEMAN- EXPRESS’’ - a cross-border cooperation project about homeland security and civil safety of a new railway line between Geneva (Switzerland) and Annemasse (France)-, my positioning puts me in the core of a constellation of policy practitioners, police forces and leadind politicians.

Name: Brianna Durkee-Pabon
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: bredurkee@gmail.com
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Marist College
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  My Body, Their Choice: The Privilege of Bodily Autonomy in the United States
Abstract:
This research seeks to establish a link between privilege and bodily autonomy rights in the United States. The concept of bodily autonomy; my body, my choice, is seen as a human right. Yet, individual bodily decision making powers vary for some classes on a situational basis. This research explores how limitations on bodily decision making disproportionately impacts individuals across various classes in relation to privilege. When laws have more control over individuals’ bodies than individuals have themselves the equal protections given by the fourteenth amendment are jeopardized. Individuals reproductive autonomy is coming under attack by state and federal government; with two Supreme Court seats being filled by conservative judges, decisions like Roe v. Wade are at risk of being overturned and could result in more restrictive autonomy rights for various classes individuals. Understanding which individuals are protected under the current law and what protections are given under the law is the first step in addressing this fundamental problem. This paper will analyze different examples of bodily and reproductive autonomy such as; male circumcision, organ donation, piercings, eugenics, abortion and other related subtopics. To answer my research question, I plan to analyzed both federal and state policies, as well as court cases and rulings to examine the protections for different classes of individuals in relation to bodily autonomy. Data on different classes of individuals such as; gender, race, sexuality, age and social class were collected to examine the influence of privilege on bodily autonomy rights, as well as, the disproportionate variance in protections under the law. Despite fourteenth amendment protections; that are in place to ensure individuals the right to make their own bodily decisions, laboratories of democracy still allow for fragmentation in state laws and limitations to exist and prevent select groups of individuals from having full bodily decision making powers. A case study on reproductive autonomy and denial of bodily autonomy in cases pertaining to reproductive rights will further reinforce that under certain laws individuals do not have full control over their bodies. I predict that women and trans-individuals, racial minorities, minors, low income and incarcerated individuals will have the least amount of bodily decision making power under the law. Whereas, individuals who possess male, white, age or social privilege will have more bodily decision making powers under the law. Through the analysis of fragmentation and limitations placed on bodily autonomy across state lines it was concluded that not all classes have equal decision making power under the law. Additionally, individuals in states with less limitations on bodily autonomy is correlated with individuals across different classes receiving more equal bodily decision making power. With these results, we can conclude that a Federal statute allowing all individuals full bodily autonomy would eliminate fragmentation in state laws and provide equal decision making rights for individuals.

Name: Samuel Ennis
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: sennis@anselm.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Saint Anselm College
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Extra! Extra! Read All About It: An Analysis of the Heterogeneous Influence Newspaper Endorsements Had on Voters in the 2016 Presidential Election
Abstract:
In the 2016 Presidential Election, Hillary Clinton received 57 of the top 100 newspaper endorsements to Donald Trump's two. Garry Johnson received four. In 2012, Barack Obama received 44 to Mitt Romney's 34. Do these endorsements matter or affect voters decisions of whom to vote for? While many scholars find newspaper endorsements to matter, I find this to be an oversimplification of the role they play. Using the American National Election Study, I compare the relationship between The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post and their endorsement or lack thereof on voters choice of whom to vote for in the 2016 and 2012 Presidential Elections. I find that in some cases, newspaper endorsements do matter. What party and what newspaper greatly impact that effectiveness. I also find that despite 2016 being an unusual year for newspaper endorsements, it does not stand out compared to 2012 in terms of effectiveness. I go on to find that whether an endorsement is surprise or not does not impact the effectiveness and that traditional factors that predict who someone votes for are not stronger than newspaper endorsements. Finally, there appears to be an additive effective with newspaper endorsements. Newspaper endorsements are still relevant, but their effectiveness varies by a number of factors.

Name: Deyja Gentile
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: deyja.gentile@wagner.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Wagner College
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  A Time for Reform: Millennial Thought on the Electoral College
Abstract:
It is the recent call to focus on the Electoral College from experts, journalists, and colleagues that led me to examine whether future generations are more likely to abolish the Electoral College. I have examined the following inquiry: How does the millennial generation’s attitude toward the Electoral College reflect a need for change in the way the United States elects its presidents? This paper will reveal how the millennial generation feels about the Electoral College and what this means for its future considering millennials are the next generation in line to take on positions of power and civic duty. To determine the thoughts and opinions of millennials, I had students at Wagner College fill out a questionnaire which had questions regarding how fair or just the Electoral College is to them, and whether the Electoral College should be abolished or not. I have found through my data collection that the majority of respondents found the Electoral College to be unfair, and most believed it should be abolished. The argument I support, based on my findings and research, is that the United States has at least one good reason to rid presidential elections of the Electoral College. The main reason being that it is becoming increasingly irrelevant and unimportant in the eyes of millennials.

Name: Ghazi Ghazi
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: ghazi@Oakland.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Oakland University
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  An Arendtian Interpretation of the Anfal Campaign
Abstract:
The Anfal campaign took place during the final phases of the Iran-Iraq War from 1986 to 1989 and led to the destruction of more than 100 villages and the disappearance of more than 182,000 men and women (CHAK 2007, 5). Iraqi authorities were later revealed to have been directly involved in organizing acts of genocide. This paper uses Hannah Arendt’s reflections on genocide, especially in “Eichmann in Jerusalem,” to make sense of how such acts were possible against the Kurds in Iraq. Keywords: Iraq, Kurdish, genocide, Anfal, Iran, war

Name: Katie Gowing
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: kgowing@albany.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: University at Albany (SUNY)
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info: Remaz Omer, University at Albany (SUNY), romer@albany.edu Ofu Takor, University at Albany (SUNY), otakor@albany.edu
Co-presenter info: Remaz Omer, University at Albany (SUNY), romer@albany.edu Ofu Takor, University at Albany (SUNY), otakor@albany.edu
Paper Title:  Girls Just Want to Have Fundamental Reproductive Rights: How Liberal Women in State Legislatures Lead to Pro-Choice State Legislation
Abstract:
With headlines surging in the media, like “Biggest Story of the 2018 Midterms: Women” and “Election Results 2018: Historic Number of Women to Serve in Congress,” an important question looms: what does this mean for women’s reproductive rights? At least 118 women have been elected to voting positions following the 2018 Midterm elections that took place on November 6th, but will more women with legislative authority change women’s reproductive rights legislation? To answer this question, we examined the relationship between states’ percentages of women in their legislatures and the percent of pro-choice laws at the state level as well as the corresponding rise in the electing of liberal women and rise in pro-choice legislation proposals. We argue that it is not necessarily women in lawmaking positions who lead to pro-choice-friendly laws, but liberal women legislators more specifically.

Name: Nancy Hernandez
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: nhernandez148@toromail.csudh.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: California State University, Dominguez Hills
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Campaign Contributions and Judicial Elections: Evidence from Louisiana Supreme Court
Abstract:
Many observers have been concerned about campaign contributions and their influence in politics. This study intends to contribute to this area of research; however, the focus is on judicial behavior. Past research has indicated that money influences judges, so this research draws from past studies to observe whether campaign contributions influence the voting behavior of elected state supreme court judges. By examining cases from the Louisiana Supreme Court from 2015 to 2018, it is argued that donations from attorneys and law firms do influence a judge’s decision in a case. When attorneys who have contributed to a judge’s political campaign appear before the judge in court, those attorneys are more likely to receive the judge’s vote in favor of their client. A statistical regression is conducted with judges’ decisions as the dependent variable and the attorneys’ contributions to the judges as the key independent variable. The findings draw into question the voting behavior of Louisiana’s Supreme Court.

Name: Leith Kusmider
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: Leithkusmider@gmail.com
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: State University of New York at New Paltz
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Afternoon
Proposal Type: Panel
Panel Title: Studies in Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict 
Panel Description: This panel is constituted from papers written in the fall 2018 SUNY New Paltz, undergraduate International Relations senior seminar. Each paper explores a facet of the relationship between environmental scarcities and violent conflict. One paper focuses primarily on the debate over “securitizing” environmental scarcity, asking if this is a wise or even effective approach to managing environmental challenges. The other two papers are case studies that explore the relationship between environmental scarcity and violence, one focused on Latin America, the other on Africa.
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Armed Conflict, Inequality and Environmental Scarcity in Colombia
Abstract:
The emergence of guerrilla forces and paramilitary squads in Colombia has lead to violent conflict and prolonged civil war. This research aims to explore the relationship between environmental scarcity and the development of armed non-state actors in Colombia.

Name: Cameron Lapine
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: clapine@anselm.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Saint Anselm College
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title: Betting Against the House: An Empirical Analysis of the Reasons Behind the Introduction and Expansion of Commercial Casino Gambling by Ballot Initiative
Abstract:
Why do some states choose to introduce or expand commercial casino gambling by ballot initiative while other states do not? Traditional reasons behind the introduction of gambling are the religious composition of the state, the fiscal condition of the state, the existence and prevalence of Native American Gaming facilities, the partisan identification of voters in the state, and the positions of local elites on the topic but research into these causes has not been applied to commercial casino gambling. I analyzed 21 ballot initiatives on the introduction or expansion of commercial casino gambling in 11 states between 2004 and 2012 to see how these traditional reasons, as well as a metric of diffusion theory, relate to commercial casino gambling ballot initiatives. None of the traditional reasons have a statistically significant relationship towards commercial casino gambling referenda, although the unemployment rate in the state comes very close to being statistically significant, nor does diffusion theory. This indicates that commercial casino gambling does not operate within the same parameters as other ballot initiatives and requires further research to better explain voters’ behavior.

Name: Remy Linback
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: rlinback@gm.slc.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Sarah Lawrence College
Scheduling Preference: Friday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Laicite as a form of French nation building
Abstract:
Laïcité, or France’s unique brand of secularism, has been the subject of much controversy as of late, and the basis of an important debate between the French right and left. On the left, many argue that laïcité has been distorted and no longer represents the same ideal that it once did. These individuals point to the discrimination against Maghrebi immigrants and Muslim French, and contrast this ill treatment with the alleged original ideals of laïcité: freedom of conscience and expression. On the other hand, many on the right argue that even laïcité’s most modern incarnation is liberal because it actually isn’t hostile to religion; rather, laws outlawing certain religious garb or symbols in public are actually protecting public peace and preventing proselytism. In my paper, I present a third perspective: I argue that laïcité’s discriminatory and assimilationist character has always been its truest form. Laïcité is often defended on the basis of its alleged neutrality in the pursuit of encouraging cooperation and harmonious coexistence among a “universal” French citizenry; the mutual adherence to this principle, and respect for republican ideals such as equality and freedom, have been advanced as key to French citizenship. Despite the supposed universality of the secular state, it has justified discriminatory policies targeting religious minorities and women since the 18th century. Rather than fostering an egalitarian and impartial public sphere, I show how laïcité has in fact been used to validate Christian norms and reinforce the politicization of religion. Although the term “laïcité” only emerged in the 20th century, it represents a long history of tension between public and private life, and a flawed form of republican universalism exacerbated by a multicultural population.

Name: Madison Mangels
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: mmangels@anselm.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Saint Anselm College New Hampshire Institute of Politics
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  #Echo-Chambers, @CrossCuttingConversations, and Political Affiliation: An Empirical Analysis of Political Homophily on Twitter
Abstract:
Social media has the capacity to allow people of varying political ideologies to exchange opinions on events in what are known as cross-cutting conversations. However, people do not do this. Twitter has become a place where users put themselves into echo-chambers to isolate themselves from dissimilar political beliefs. This paper seeks to determine whether conservatives or liberals are more likely to put themselves into echo-chambers on Twitter as well as why this occurs. I will also look into whether self-identifying or researcher-identified ideologues are more likely to put themselves into echo-chambers. I will also offer explanations as to why conservatives or liberals might put themselves into echo-chambers. An analysis of a random sample of political tweets was collected and the authors of the tweets were coded into a database based on ideology, identification type, tweet language, and the number of partisan accounts they followed. The results of this study determined that conservatives were more likely than liberals to put themselves into echo-chambers on Twitter. One reason conservatives are likely to put themselves into echo-chambers is due to their psychological behavior and levels of openness to information, which differs greatly from the political behavior of liberals. Political polarization on social media sites is a growing concern in a country that is becoming increasingly politically divided and has the potential to sway voters and impact users’ perceptions of the relationship between their opinions and the facts.

Name: Elizabeth Martirosian
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: elizabethmartirosian@greenmtn.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Green Mountain College
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Afternoon
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Will Elephant Skin become the New Ivory?
Abstract:
The ivory ban under CITES has been a deliberating and great stride taken by the international community to address elephants as endangered species and to increase their protection. China, a country with one of the largest markets for ivory, passed a full ban in 2017. While the demand for ivory has decreased, Asian elephant populations continue to have a steady decline since demands shifted away from ivory towards elephant skin. Markets between China and neighboring South-Southeast Asian countries have grown to facilitate illegal wildlife trade, black markets, and the trade for elephant parts, particularly elephant skin making Asian elephants vulnerable targets. At the beginning of the 20th Century, there was an estimate of 100,000 wild Asian elephants, today the estimate is between 35,000-40,000 wild Asian elephants left. Emerging markets are increasing in Southeast Asian countries where illegal wildlife trafficking is a low political priority to address, with reported evidence of senior government officials complicit in trades. The Environmental Investigation Agency reported an alarming increase in elephant skin trading particularly targeting Asian elephant mothers and calves. Contrasting the trade of elephant skin to the trade of ivory tusks, poaching elephants for their skin is “indiscriminate.” Asian elephant males have been targeted for ivory, but the demand for elephant skin targets, poisons, and skins elephant females and calves. Fauna and Flora International of Myanmar expressed the potential of wild elephants, particularly the Asian elephant of Myanmar going extinct in the near future. Elephants are killed for their meat and skin, which local informants say are trafficked across the Myanmar and China borders, particularly Mong La. Until its 2017 ivory ban, China had the largest markets in the world for ivory, permitting the sale of five tons of ivory per year. Mong La in Myanmar is on the border with China and has become an emerging market as a “Chinese enclave in Myanmar,” tailored exclusively for the Chinese, selling ivory and elephants parts illegally traded as the demand comes from China. Dried elephant skin pieces, ivory, even molars, and bones were discovered. Elephant skin is becoming profitable, costing 12 times more in China than where it is sourced in Myanmar. While China’s ivory ban was a large step in the right direction, the unintended consequences are unfolding by shifting trade beyond ivory and towards elephant parts such as skin which has been highly neglected and under-researched by CITES. Effective law enforcement remains difficult, especially in countries where wildlife protection is not prioritized and wildlife, particularly elephants are seen as pests resulting in increased human-elephant conflicts. Asian elephants are intended to receive the highest form of protection under Appendix I of CITES, yet domestic application and implementation of the law does not ensure the full protection of Asian elephants.

Name: Shankara Narayanan
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: shankara.narayanan@uconn.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT
Scheduling Preference: Saturday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  American Imperium: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power
Abstract:
America claims the mantle of the world’s first superpower, using its military, trade, and liberal-capitalist ideology to pursue its international agenda. Suffering a financial collapse, facing domestic division and inequality, and with the “War on Terror” entering its seventeenth year, pundits and leaders worldwide increasingly believe America’s global power is declining. Simultaneously, the great powers of the world are asserting themselves. China’s expansion includes strategic integration with Africa and Asia, and domination of its regional waters—challenging America’s Asian primacy. Similarly, Russia’s revanchism manifests itself in Eastern European and Middle Eastern affairs. China and Russia fill the “Eurasian Heartland” of Sir Halford Mackinder. His 1904 Heartland Thesis holds that powers occupying the “Eurasian Heartland”—stretching from Eastern Europe to the Altai Mountains—threaten global security. Heartland powers from the Mongolian Empire to the Soviet Union expanded using land-power, coming into conflict with European sea-power, and recently American sea-power. The Soviet Union was America’s Cold War Heartland rival, while China may be America’s Heartland rival of the 21st century. This paper addresses the influence of Heartland Theory on U.S. Cold War strategy, and its applicability to the post-Cold War displacement of the U.S. by Eurasian rivals. It evaluates Cold War strategy by analyzing Mackinder’s influence on George F. Kennan, Henry Kissinger, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, grounded in an examination of Mackinder’s publications. Widely recognized as architects of U.S. Cold War strategy, Kennan, Kissinger, and Brzezinski utilized Heartland Theory to further American Cold War objectives. Their articles, books, memos, and briefs demonstrate independent recognitions of Mackinder’s theories separated by decades—a geostrategic continuity in U.S. Cold War foreign policy. Additionally, the paper synthesizes works from several schools of U.S. diplomatic history, juxtaposing Heartland Theory with revisionist and triumphalist arguments to better understand the merits of characterizing U.S. foreign policy using Heartland Theory. Regardless of whether U.S. foreign policy exploited markets or constructed “liberal order”, the strategy employed drew from Mackinder’s geography. Lastly, the paper applies Mackinder’s Heartland Thesis to modern power politics, analyzing Russia and China as 21st century Heartland powers. Despite their dual occupation of the Eurasian Heartland, China appears to be the classic Heartland power based on recent scholarly publications and the strategic publications of the U.S. government. Its naval buildup, however, twists Mackinder’s theories. A Heartland power possessing maritime capabilities, he argued, proves the greatest threat to global security. Analyzing Heartland theory raises further questions. At its core, Mackinder’s thesis posits that a nation first control vital trade routes and regions plentiful in economic resources, harnessing them to develop military capabilities and consolidate territory to then become a great power. Have the economically vital regions of the world changed? Mackinder focused on the potential of railways criss-crossing the Heartland to revolutionize power politics. However, the importance of modern trade routes in the Middle East and the waters of South and East Asia—such as the Suez Canal, Strait of Hormuz, and Strait of Malacca—suggest that 21st century great power competition may revolve around new geographic points.

Name: Jordan Pagan
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: Jordan.pagan@wagner.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Wagner Colllege
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  New York City Economic Land Use & Transit: Fixing our Subway, Financing our Future
Abstract:
A paper discussing the issues plaguing the New York City Subway, the history behind the problems and a potential solution. The fix is in privatizing the Subway, similarly to how Japan has done; they now boast one of the most efficient and super modern transit systems in the world. By juxtaposing the development of New York City property and land, and the impact of having an effective transit line in those areas has, the correlation between the two is this: the better the Subway, the area around it tends to advance further socioeconomically and culturally. Thus, if we can modernize and expand our Subway, we will effectively propel our neighborhoods into an upsurge, increasing quality of life for millions of New York City residents.

Name: Courtney Rivera
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: sliszcl01@mail.buffalostate.edu
Professional Status: Graduate Student
Institution: SUNY Buffalo State
Scheduling Preference: Friday Morning
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title: Discovery 
Abstract:
Research Question: My question is about Civil Procedure and the basics of law from the complaint until discovery or court. The basis for all research will surround the question are the current rules for discovery just to both parties and does one party seem to have more success? The basis of my research is researching the legal process to be better equipped for law school. H1: Current procedure for the discovery is bias to the Defendant because lack of resources (money, legal knowledge) for a defendant to properly conduct discovery. This leads to a upper hand for plaintiff lawyers. And a outcome which is indemnifying to a defendant because of over indulgence of information. Disclosure eliminates any privacy in the litigation. H2: The discovery process instated will increase the chance a defendant will settle for avoidance of costly discovery. and the chance the defendant will accept the settlement will greatly increase but the settlement is usually unfair and relatively lower when defendant is of lower income. Dependent Variables: Bias in the Discovery process, court proceedings. Intimidation to defendant’s to settle before discovery. Independent Variables: Torts, Civil procedure, civil procedure reforms.

Name: Lee Scaralia
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: lscarali@fandm.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Franklin & Marshall College
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Making Sense of U.S. Populism
Abstract:
How do political campaigns construct, deploy, and leverage political identities through electoral cycles? This ongoing ethnographic and interview project is concerned with the way "insiders" and "outsiders" are created among those working on the Jess King for Congress 2018 campaign, including paid staff, volunteers, formal interns, and prospective voters. Under the guidance of Dr. Biko Koenig, I interned with the campaign from June 2018 through the election to gain and "insider's" perspective-- and to understand the work that this political identity performs in the context of an electoral campaign. Preliminary findings include: as a left-populist, Jess King united people as insiders on her campaign regardless of previous political party association; that there is some difference between intern and volunteer identity that is encouraged by the titles assigned by campaign staff, but is more strictly enforced by interns and volunteers themselves; that the only initiation to the campaign truly necessary for many voters is one informative phone call by another volunteer. The paper examines the construction of these identities alongside other electoral and political tactics designed to activate and excite voters within the context of Trump populism.

Name: Mahina Taglies
Section: Identity Politics
Professional Email: Mahina.taglies@wagner.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Wagner College
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title: What is gender:  AN EXPLORATION OF WHAT GENDER IS, THE CONTROVERSIES OF TRANSGENDER, AND A BRIEF LOOK INTO INTERNATIONAL TRANSGENDER RIGHTS
Abstract:
The topic of gender has evolved considerably in Western society from the classification of grammar in languages to the representation of “traits typically associated with one sex”. Indigenous cultures have had a different experience of gender through their concept of gender beyond the binary of male and female. Transgender individuals have been a part of non-western culture for generations, tying into social standing, culture, and state classification while the gender spectrum in the United States has been vastly expanding. In this paper, I will be conducting a comparative analysis of gender classification and rights in the United States, India, and Japan, drawing examples from the transgender in the United States, the Hijras in India, and Onnagata Kabuki performers in Japan.

Name: Carly Van Syckle
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: cvansyckle@albany.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: University at Albany SUNY
Scheduling Preference: Friday Afternoon
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  The Lasting Effects of Institutionalized Discrimination
Abstract:
The problem of police brutality has become commonplace in countries such as the United States, South Africa, and Brazil. By examining these three countries using the most different systems design, it can be found that there are differences in the countries' locations, GDPs, and HDIs. The key independent variable that each of the three countries had in common was a history of institutionalized discrimination. In the United States, slavery led to the Jim Crow Era, which paved the way for the mass incarceration of minorities, allowing for high amounts of police brutality. Slavery in South Africa turned into the discriminatory political system known as apartheid, enabling police forces to act in violent manners. And in Brazil, the history of slavery and discrimination present in the form of laws contributed to current discrimination in the form of police brutality. If countries have a history of institutionalized discrimination, they are likely to have high police brutality present. As a result of these findings, changes should be implemented to educate law enforcement on the history of discrimination and its possible link to police brutality in order to ensure that history doesn’t repeat itself as discrimination in the form of excessive police brutality.

Name: Katherine Viscardi
Section: Undergraduate Research
Professional Email: Katherine.viscardi@wagner.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Wagner College
Scheduling Preference:
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  The Sustainability of Mass Tourism in Kinderdijk, Netherlands
Abstract:
In the last few decades, the small Dutch village of Kinderdijk, Netherlands – known for its windmills -- has endured a massive rise in tourism. In this paper, I analyze the effects and impact of the overtourism in this region, as well as offer a comparative analysis of the case of Kinderdijk and other destinations that have dealt with similar problems of overtourism. The paper further offers an assessment of how the existing policies and procedures implemented by the Kinderdijk Heritage Foundation (SWEK), intended to manage tourism in the village, are not sufficient to maintain the current flow of visitors. The analysis suggests that tourism is vital to the village; however, the current techniques for managing tourists are inadequate and unsustainable. I conclude the paper with two policy recommendations. The first is the implementation of a monitoring program for both the village’s infrastructure as well as the locals, and the second is the reduction in the existing tourist cap that currently allocates for 600,000 travelers to arrive every year. Keywords: sustainability, unsustainable, overtourism, Kinderdijk, UNESCO, SWEK

Name: Michael Wang
Section: American Politics
Professional Email: mwang@hamilto.edu
Professional Status: Undergraduate Student
Institution: Hamilton College
Scheduling Preference: No Preference
Proposal Type: Paper
Panel Title:
Panel Description:
Co-author info:
Co-presenter info:
Paper Title:  Inconsistent Incognito Mode: Exploring States’ Online Privacy Law Variance in the U.S.
Abstract:
This paper categories states’ privacy law by strength and then examines what factors potentially affect the variance of state privacy law strength, such as population demographics. Academic literature has established that economic factors, special interest groups, and party lines often explain and influence legislative outcomes, such as healthcare legislation. This paper applies the same logic, but to the question of online privacy law. First, this paper defines strong versus weak privacy law and places states on a continuum 0 (weak) to 20 (strong) based on their 2018 internet privacy law. Then, a fifty-state regression analysis is conducted to understand the various independent variables at play that affect weak versus strong privacy law. The regression, which accounted for over fifty variables, identified race and election results as the two top drivers of online privacy law strength. The most influential variables are then analyzed in detail and discussed through the lens of two case studies: (to be determined). A clear understanding of the top influencers of online privacy law strength will enable policy makers to better shape privacy law, whether that be strengthening it for companies or improving user privacy protection.