POLiticaL science aLumni newsLetter

summer 2011
uniVersitY OF iLLinOis at urbana-chamPaign

PS Alumni Newsletter SU11

Letter from the head

Dear Alumni and Friends, I hope you are having a great summer! While the faculty and students represent the public face of our department, we could not achieve our research and teaching excellence without a strong support staff. As in many large organizations, the role of the staff has changed dramatically over the past two decades. Long ago (before I became a professor), staff provided support to individual faculty members by answering phones, typing syllabi and manuscripts, and scheduling appointments. With changes in information and communication technology, however, staff responsibilities have evolved dramatically. No longer do they perform tasks for individual faculty. Instead, they are responsible for an everwider and more complex array of organizational duties, including budget management, course scheduling, human resources, and compliance with the university, state, and federal regulations. These functions are vital to the departments missions. Handling these responsibilities is even more challenging in an era of staff reductionsduring my twelve years in the department, we have gone from eight full-time staff members to only three. The staff members remaining need to be knowledgeable, diligent, flexible, and proactive. The department has been fortunate to have such a staff, and theyve been a large part of our overall success. Their efforts make it possible for faculty and advisors to concentrate on their primary responsibilities of teaching classes, mentoring students, and conducting research. We are extremely grateful for everything they do to make the department a better place. This summer, the staff is in transition. We sadly say good-bye to margarita Ham, who is retiring from the position of assistant to the head after a decade of service to our department. The assistant to the head is the lead staff person in the department, charged with overseeing all aspects of the departments budget and human resources. margarita fulfilled those responsibilities admirably.

ever cheerful and gracious, she was responsive and skillful in her management of the departments affairs. As department head, I relied on her judgment and advice. margarita is retiring to the Philadelphia area, where she will live with her husband, a psychology professor, who has accepted a position at the university of Delaware. We will certainly miss her, and we wish her well. We are pleased to welcome Carol Hartman as the new assistant to the head. ms. Hartman holds an mA in French Literature and an mBA from Indiana university. she has served in a variety of positions on our campus, most recently working in a similar capacity in the Department of economics. An avid swimmer, Carol has swum the english Channel and participated in other long-distance swim competitions. We look forward to working with her over the coming years. In any discussion of the staff, I would be remiss in failing to mention Brenda stamm, who has been with the department for almost 15 years. Brenda wears many hats in the department: she is the secretary to the head, the graduate secretary, the secretary for the Civic Leadership Program, and the secretary for the Illinois-in-Washington program. With all those responsibilities, it is obvious that Brenda is invaluable to our departments operation. An unparalleled professional, she was recently recognized with a College staff Award as one of the best on our campus in her position. Over the coming weeks, Carol and Brenda and the department will be working to coordinate our move to David Kinley Hall. The construction crews are preparing the finishing touches to our new space. We look forward to settling in and hope that you will pay us a visit there the next time you are on campus. Best, Bill Bernhard

PS Alumni Newsletter

SU11

Next steps iN afghaNistaN

On Wednesday, June 22, President Obama informed the country of his decision to withdraw U.S. forces in Afghanistan, promised when he announced a surge of 30,000 additional troops into the country 18 months ago. How ready is Afghanistan for such a transition, whether fast or slow? Are the pieces in place for long-term stability? paul diehl, the Henning Larsen Professor of Political Science, is the author of books on both war and peacekeeping, and directs the Correlates of War Project, the worlds largest data collection effort on international conflict. Diehl was interviewed by News Bureau social sciences editor Craig Chamberlain.

Craig Chamberlain: Where do you see progress in Afghanistan, in terms of its own stability and self-interest? Paul Diehl: The u.s. government has most recently used a series of benchmarks to assess progress, including changes in the levels of violence, the stability of individual districts, the development of Afghan security forces, and the Afghan governments responsibility for key functions. measured against the situation last year, there have been a number of incremental improvements on all dimensions. For example, violent incidents in Kandahar province have declined and the size of the Afghan national army has increased. CC: What gives you pause? PD: The major concern is the slow pace of progress despite the increase in u.s. troops and the significant development aid granted to the country. It is also not clear that improvements will necessarily continue in the future, suggesting that we might be approaching limits beyond which little progress is possible in the near future. Government corruption and poor quality local security forces remain sticking points. CC: You note that a variety of factorsamong them the countrys size, its rugged terrain, lack of infrastructure, poverty and tribalism make Afghanistan a poor candidate for stability, much less democracy. Whats the best you think we should hope for, assuming we dont want to stay indefinitely? PD: I think that u.s. and NATO goals have become much less ambitious. British Prime minister (David) Cameron has said that we cannot expect a perfect democracy in Afghanistan. The next u.s. ambassador to Afghanistan, ryan Crocker, is even more circumspect, striving for sustainable stability. That might be the best outcome, characterized by a relatively weak central government, some accommodation with the Talban in which it controls certain areas of the country, a less porous border with Pakistan, and more limited and sporadic violence. It seems that recently begun negotiations with the Taliban are dedicated to achieving such an outcome. CC: The killing of Osama bin Laden, combined

with growing federal deficit concerns and declining support from the public, has some in both parties arguing for a rapid exit. But based on past experience, including that in Iraq, whats a realistic timeline? PD: The key factors you note are essentially u.s. domestic political considerations and not reflective of the u.s. governments own benchmarks for success. If the former drive u.s. decisions with respect to troop withdrawal and Afghan policy in general, then the timeline will likely be determined by the electoral calendar and President Obamas approval ratings in 2012. One might expect that some significant decisions will be made in the coming months, but often deadlines on troop withdrawal and the like are set well into the future. Circumstances change and implementation of many provisions will likely be scheduled after the 2012 elections. Thus, it would be premature to accept that what is planned or promised in the near term will come to fruition. CC: Does history hold any lessons for how long such efforts can be maintained, especially by a democracy? PD: scholarly studies indicate that 70 percent of attempts to impose democracies by external powers fail within two generations. Among those that do succeed, key ingredients are the willingness of the occupying power to sustain its troop presence and support. There is no simple answer to how long a state can maintain such support, and indeed, the length of commitment required varies by context. Yet even a sustained commitment is not enough, as imposed democracies best take root in societies that are ethnically homogeneous and are surrounded by other democratic states in their regional neighborhood. Neither of these conditions characterizes Afghanistan. note: This is an edited version of an interview originally published by the University of Illinois News Bureau on July 5, 2011, online at illinois. edu/lb/article/72/52553.

PS Alumni Newsletter SU11

moNey aNd democratic represeNtatioN

Craig Chamberlain University of Illinois News Bureau Tiberiu Dragu is an assistant professor of political science. His research interests include American political institutions, law, and judicial politics. note: This is an edited version of an article originally published by the University of Illinois News Bureau on May 25, 2011, online at news. illinois.edu/news/11/0525representation_TiberiuDragu.html.

One person, one vote is often the rallying cry for democratic reform, suggesting everyone should get an equal say in their government. Yet in some of the oldest and largest democracies, some votes are worth far more than others by design. A Wyoming voter, for instance, is significantly over-represented compared with a California voter. each state has two u.s. senators, but California has 66 times more people. How much does it matter? According to a recent study of decades of data, from the u.s. and eight other countries, it matters a lot when it comes to money. Other things being equal, the most over-represented states or provinces can expect to receive more than twice the federal funding per capita as the most under-represented states or provinces, according to Tiberiu Dragu, co-author of the study with Jonathan rodden. In some examples from south America, they found a funding difference of five to one. Dragu is a professor of political science at the university of Illinois; rodden is a professor of political science at stanford university. Their study, representation and redistribution in Federations, one of the few to examine the issue over multiple countries, was published online this month in the Proceedings of the National Academy of sciences. The authors made use of three decades of data from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, mexico, spain, switzerland and the u.s. All are democracies structured as federations, in which partially self-governing states or provinces are united under a central government. In coming to their conclusions, they account for numerous other factors that have been suggested as contributing to the imbalances in federal funding among them population density, poverty, economic development, location and past political power (such as a state might derive from being part of the nations founding). The relationship between representation and per-capita funding, however, cannot be explained away, Dragu said. In all nine countries, the story remains the same: representatives of over-represented provinces are

able to bargain for a disproportionate share of the budget, he said. Or as the authors write in their paper: Our analysis indicates that the rules of representation are indeed highly consequential. Controlling for a variety of country- and province-level factors and using a variety of estimation techniques, we show that overrepresented provinces in political unions around the world are rather dramatically favored in the distribution of resources. The study focused on established federations because they almost always involve some form of unequal representation, often resulting from the political bargain struck at the nations founding, Dragu said. The imbalance therefore is accepted by the citizens, shrugged off as a quirky and perhaps inconsequential legacy of a proud history, he said. The studys results, however, might have important implications in a wide range of settings where the foundational bargain is neither old nor widely revered, Dragu said. They also could challenge assumptions that such unequal representation is necessary as a pathway to peace and stability, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq, or the european union, he said. An important open question is whether the stability of such federations is threatened if citizens of under-represented regions or ethnic groups, or countries must provide large, permanent subsidies to those with greater representation.

PS Alumni Newsletter

SU11

redistrictiNg iN iLLiNois
It comes just once a decade, but strongly shapes the politics and policymaking in the decade that follows, says University of Illinois political scientist brian gaines. Call it redistricting, or call it gerrymandering, its the often-contentious process of redrawing state legislative and U.S. congressional districts following each U.S. Census. The new maps for Illinois are now headed for the governors desk following approval Tuesday by the state senate. Are the new maps fair? And how much do voters care about district boundaries? Gaines was interviewed by News Bureau social sciences editor Craig Chamberlain. More about fairness in redistricting and Illinois voters views on the issue can be found in Gaines contributions to Rethinking Redistricting, a report produced by the universitys Institute of Government and Public Affairs. You can find the report online at igpa.uillinois.edu/ system/files/rethinking-redistricting-IGPAreport_0.pdf.

Craig Chamberlain: Just in political terms, how would you say these maps stack up in terms of fairness? Brian Gaines: If you equate fairness with a bipartisan or non-partisan process, these maps certainly fail. They were crafted by partisan insiders operating mostly in secret, and they passed by straight party votes in both chambers. Democrats control the state government, and theyve used their power to the full, especially in the redrawing of congressional districts. In terms of fairness of outcomes, in the short-term, people focus on incumbents, and how much their districts change. In the longer term, the question is how the new districts, which will be in use until 2020, stack up in terms of their normal voting tendencies. How many districts appear to be safe, and how many competitive?

In brief, these maps were plainly designed to harm republican incumbents and to reduce the number of expected republican seats. CC: Assuming Gov. Quinn signs the new maps into law, and theres no successful challenge in the courts, who are the biggest losers in the u.s. House? BG: There are 11 republicans and eight Democrats in the Illinois delegation at present. The 18 new districts (down from 19) were ruthlessly drawn to confront at least five republicans with hugely different districts and unappetizing options: move, face off in a primary against a fellow GOP incumbent, or run in a very tough seat, wooing unfamiliar voters. Adam Kinzinger, Bob Dold, Judy Biggert, randy Hultgren and Joe Walsh are all affected. Tim Johnson was not paired with another downstate republican, but he was drawn into a district that little resembles the old 15th. CC: How does this differ from the last congressional redistricting, in 2002? BG: Last time, with divided government, the two maps differed dramatically. The u.s. House map was a bipartisan construction and was, in political science parlance, an incumbent protection act. The General Assembly map was a Democratic creation and was designed to inflate small advantages in Democratic vote shares into much larger advantages in seat shares. CC: If redistricting is so important, why do you think it gets so little attention? BG: Drawing legally valid districts is a fairly technical matter, and the entire process is shrouded in jargon and legalese. It suits politicians in power to pretend that it is impossible to get serious, broad input on maps because of the technical difficulty of constructing legally valid districts. media accounts too rarely distinguish between different kinds of gerrymander and leave voters confused. CC: You co-directed a rare survey of voters last year on the issue of redistricting. Do they care as little as weve been led to believe? BG: We found that very few registered voters knew how the last maps were drawn, but that

they had strong preferences for a non-partisan process and for simple shapes. Voters are not well informed about redistricting, but they know that it is important and they know what theyd like to see in maps. CC: Based on that survey, how do voters judge the fairness of redrawn districts? BG: Among their top priorities is compactness, or the simplicity of the district shapes. It is very popular with ordinary voters because they rightly suspect that twisty, elongated districts arise because they were constructed to serve some political purpose to help or harm a given party or particular politician, or to achieve some desired level of racial segregation of voters. The latter is unpopular with voters, but is also more or less understood to be required by the Voting rights Act at present. even strong partisans say they like simple shapes and do not like gerrymanders designed to help their own party. The least compact district on the new map is the 4th congressional in Chicago, and it strongly resembles its immediate predecessor: It is a claw-shaped district constructed to be majority-Hispanic. Given where spanish speakers live in Chicago, the only way to construct such a district in Illinois is to throw compactness standards out the window. But elsewhere, the map is also full of suspicious jots and zags. The mapmakers clearly did not prioritize simple shapes. note: This is an edited version of an interview originally published by the University of Illinois News Bureau on June 1, 2011, online at illinois. edu/lb/article/72/51950.

PS Alumni Newsletter SU11

oN the greek debt crisis

Protesters clashed with police in the streets of Athens during the last week of June as the Greek Parliament debated and then passed a set of deeply unpopular austerity measures required for the nation to receive aid and avoid defaulting on its debt. What brought on the crises, and how much does it threaten the 27-nation European Union and the world economy? Political scientist kostas kourtikakis, a native of Greece and visiting lecturer at the University of Illinois, is an expert on the EU and its institutions, as well as on the politics of Greece and the region. Kourtikakis was interviewed by News Bureau social sciences editor Craig Chamberlain.

Craig Chamberlain: How did Greece get in this economic mess? Kostas Kourtikakis: After Greece adopted the euro in 2002, successive governments were unable many say unwilling to implement economic reforms, which were necessary for the Greek economy to become competitive. At the same time, their membership in the eurozone (the 17 eu nations using the euro currency) allowed Greece to borrow money with a super low interest rate. The result was a budget with too many expenses and not enough revenue. Then, after markets took notice of the Greek debt problem in October 2009 and the fear of default emerged, other eurozone members, especially France and Germany, did not act swiftly enough to contain the crisis. CC: Why have Greek citizens reacted so angrily to the austerity program now approved by their government? KK: When the first austerity measures were introduced in 2010, Greeks accepted them as necessary for avoiding default. In my opinion, two things have happened since then that have caused anger. First, there is a widespread perception in the middle and working classes that they are disproportionately burdened with austerity, because they are easier

targets for tax hikes and benefit cuts. At the same time, rich elites, which for many years have engaged in rampant tax evasion, remain untouched by the measures. The second and more serious reason is that trust between citizens and political elites the foundation of representative democracy seems to have seriously eroded. Greek citizens have always suspected that some of their elected representatives were corrupt and untrustworthy, but the crisis has led to a blanket assessment that all politicians are basically liars. Despite all this, most demonstrators were in fact peaceful. some of the most severe incidents we saw on TV were caused by a minority of extremist youths, a long-time tradition in Greek demonstrations. CC: The recent measures taken by the Greek government are only the latest news in an ongoing series of debt troubles in various eu countries. Are they all in trouble for the same reasons? KK: Currently only three eurozone countries have received bailouts: Greece, Ireland and Portugal. each one got into trouble for a different reason. In Greece the main problem was excessive government borrowing, while in Ireland the problem was originally caused by overexposure of the banking sector. regardless of the reason these countries got into trouble, however, they all face the same problem: Investors are very reluctant to lend them money because they dont think they will get it back. We could say that these countries have a credibility problem. The purpose of the austerity measures is to restore credibility, so that Greece, Ireland and Portugal can borrow money in the open market again. many experts however have doubts that the measures will produce the desired outcome and prevent default. CC: Can the eu afford to give other nations the same monetary support, or is there a breaking point? KK: many analysts agree that spain is the breaking point. spain is the fourth largest economy in the eurozone and, many fear, the next in line for a bailout. It will be extremely difficult but still possible to secure funds and

even political support for a spanish rescue. The next domino to fall after spain would be Italy, and there is an emerging consensus that the funds for a bailout of the eurozones third largest economy cant be secured. CC: Who would be the ultimate losers if Greece defaults on its debt? KK: The potential losers from a default, which many experts see as inevitable, would depend on how it plays out. In the worstcase scenario, the crisis would spread to the entire eurozone and beyond. This could have catastrophic effects for the global economy, including the u.s. In the ensuing panic, lenders would consider all government debt as toxic and would refuse to finance it. As a result, many governments prudent and profligate alike would start defaulting on their debt. In this case, a Greek default would resemble the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008, which had a knock-on effect for the international banking system. Optimists, however, expect that the effects of a Greek default can be limited to Greece. Whether one of the two scenarios, or something in between, will materialize in the future depends on how eurozone governments handle the crisis now. CC: Youve found that Americans have trouble understanding the importance of the eu and how it works. What can we learn from these ongoing crises? KK: What Americans, and indeed anybody, can understand from the european sovereign debt crisis is that after 60 years of integration european economies are so tightly intertwined that they may rise and fall together. europe remains a continent of nation-states but the common institutions and policies of the eu is a very important variable that we need to keep in mind when we try to understand political and economic developments in europe. note: This is an edited version of an interview originally published by the University of Illinois News Bureau on July 7, 2011, online at illinois. edu/lb/article/72/52657/.

PS Alumni Newsletter

SU11

coNVocatioN 2011
Around 2000 guests watched students march across the stage at the Political science and International Interdisciplinary studies convocation on may 14 at Huff Hall. We congratulate them all, and wish them the best of luck.

Department of Political science / university of illinois at urbana-champaign 240 Computing Applications Building / 605 e springfield Ave / Champaign, IL 61821 217.333.3881 / pol@illinois.edu cover photo: Pete souza / Associated Press