The Voting Rights Act was a monumental achievement of the modern struggle for racial equality in the United States. After legislators from both parties passed the law in 1965, sustained implementation was enabled by broad bipartisan support. Congress has renewed and strengthened the act several times, sometimes pushing into territory the Supreme Court was reluctant to sanction. The most recent reauthorization in 2006 was strongly supported by President George W. Bush, and by many Republicans as well as Democrats in Congress.

But the long stretch of broad support is at an end. During arguments in a 2009 case before the Supreme Court, both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy expressed concern that the act’s enforcement authority may have outlived its utility. Their skepticism was directed at Section 5, which authorizes the Department of Justice to block changes in election rules in states designated for special scrutiny because of their history of legalized racial discrimination. Since 2009, state Republican leaders have swelled the chorus of doubters.

more...

The 2010 elections were a high mark for Tea Party funders and voters determined to reshape the Republican Party and block President Obama’s agenda. With low voter turnout and high public frustration during a slow economic recovery, Tea Party Republicans triumphed in Congress and many states. But the 2012 contests proved much more treacherous. In contests where younger and minority voters turned out in force, many GOP candidates could not manage simultaneously to propitiate Tea Party sympathizers and appeal to other voters.

Republicans lost the 2012 presidential contest and gave ground in Congress, but no one should imagine that Tea Party forces have left the field. They remain determined to block Obama initiatives and make new electoral and policy gains in the years to come. more...

In his 2011 State of the Union Address, President Obama invoked “our Sputnik moment.” Recalling U.S. investments in research and education after Russia launched the first space satellite half a century ago, the President called for renewed efforts to meet international competition with investments in education and research, renewable energy, biomedical science and information technologies. Obama’s call to action still matters. more...

As female roles and rights change quickly across the globe, women’s organizations push for gender equality in developed and developing countries alike. But how do such organizations make a difference beyond economic trends and government policy? Part of the answer lies in international relationships and leverage. Nonprofit groups are involved, and so is the United Nations, which sponsors many initiatives and has regularly convened world conferences. Most recently, the Fourth World Conference on Women was held in Beijing, China in 1995.

United Nations world conferences are like years-long political campaigns. Some 5,000 government delegates and 30,000 women activists gathered in Beijing for two weeks in late August and early September in 1995. But years of mobilization preceded and followed. more...

Ratified in 1951, the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States limits the number of terms a president can serve to two – and it is a lifetime restriction. Living two-term presidents such as Bill Clinton and George W. Bush are thus excluded from ever serving again. The irony of the limit is that even the most politically successful contemporary presidents – those who achieve reelection – reach the peak of their careers and the beginning of their decline at the same moment, when they raise their hands to be sworn in at the second Inauguration.

From that moment, second termers are known to be leaving office on a date certain. Inexorably, their influence is on the wane. So how much can re-elected presidents accomplish in their last four years? Although the options are limited, they are not all bad, because over two and a half centuries the office of the U.S. presidency has accumulated significant powers. more...

For decades, social scientists have been looking for damaging effects from particular media forms, especially those enabled by new communication technologies. Does television make us stupid? Is the Internet undermining social ties? Despite many research efforts, there is very little uncontested empirical evidence of generally damaging media effects.

If social scientific methods have not shown that the media are doing us harm, why do so many of us still believe that one sort of communications media or another causes serious damage to individuals or society? My research on media criticism and its history has convinced me that our mistrust of communications media tells us more about ambivalence about modern life than it does about any actual ill effects from new modes of communication. more...

Electricity generation is by far the biggest global warming culprit. Electricity generating plants account for one-quarter of all carbon emissions for which human activity is responsible – and their harmful emissions have shot up by sixty percent over the past two decades, especially as China and India have experienced rapid economic growth. Because electric generation is so important, many researchers and regulators believe limiting emissions from that sector is the key to a low-carbon future. The goal is to do this without undermining economic growth.

One regulatory approach applies new rules to each nation’s entire electricity sector. But would that work? Some critics argue that setting emissions limits for all plants in a sector is a relatively lax approach that will leave individual plants free to keep polluting at dangerous levels. Our research contributes to this debate by paying careful attention to the various rates at which power plants emit carbon dioxide within the electricity sectors of each major nation. We find big variations from plant to plant, and we argue that carbon emissions can be greatly reduced – within each country, and across the globe – if regulators simply focus on lowering the unusually high carbon emissions of each country’s most extreme polluters. more...

As the debate over immigration reform heats up, a number of contentious issues are front and center – including competition over jobs, border security, and the very meaning of U.S. citizenship. Politicians and pundits have plenty to say about these topics, and no doubt there will also be fierce debates about which public benefits should be available to new citizens or people on a “path to citizenship.” At what point, if any, should formerly undocumented residents gain access to welfare benefits, unemployment insurance, or the new protections included in the recently enacted health reform law?

One important topic that may not get enough attention is how the basic health of immigrants themselves could be affected by reforms. Will reforms make it easier for all migrants to get timely and adequate health care, not just for sudden problems like injuries in an accident but also for chronic diseases? The answers matter not just for the wellbeing of newcomers themselves, but for the health and prosperity of all Americans, the neighbors and co-workers of immigrants. more...

In May of 2013, the American Psychiatric Association will publish the much-anticipated fifth edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – a tome often called the “Bible of psychiatry” because it defines every recognized mental disorder and is used in all facets of the U.S. system of mental health care and psychiatric research. The first edition of this manual appeared just over six decades ago, and periodic revisions since then have evolved into major events with high stakes for patients, researchers, and mental health care providers. Over the years the process of revision has become highly controversial, as more and more disorders have been identified. Is America really suffering from an “epidemic” of mental illnesses? more...

Unimaginable until the twentieth century, the clinical practice of transferring eggs and sperm from one person’s body to another individual’s body is now the basis of a multi-billion dollar fertility industry. But who provides the eggs and sperm, and how do they think about their involvement? To find out, I combined historical and statistical evidence with interviews of staff and donors at egg agencies and sperm banks. My findings highlight the role of gendered stereotypes in the day-to-day operations of the fertility business. Different rules apply to male and female donors, who experience the transactions very differently. more...