In 2016, the global median favorability of the United States stood at 64%; in 2017, median favorability dropped to 39%. Causes for anti-American attitudes have been difficult to pinpoint, but research suggests the reach of the United States military-approximately 800 foreign military installments in 70 countries-could have a part in America's negative image. Past research has considered the impact of military presence on anti-Americanism versus the lack thereof. But, whether a greater military presence (i.e. more troops, funding, and base cost) accounts for higher levels of anti-American attitudes has not been considered. My research studies whether greater levels of military presence, measured by Plant Replacement Value (PRV), acreage, and personnel, contribute to unfavorable attitudes towards the United States. I predict that greater military presence significantly increases anti-Americanism because an overt outside military presence attributes to a perception of the United States as intrusive, politically motivated, and imperialistic. I use attitudinal data from the Pew Global Attitudes Project and data pertaining to military presence from the Department of Defense's annual Base Structure Report. This relationship, if substantiated, could have important consequences on the future of American trust, power, and foreign policy.

Scholars continue to be perplexed by the low rates of Asian American political participation despite their relatively high levels of education and income, two factors which have been shown to be strong predictors of political behavior among whites, African Americans, and Latinos. What is different about Asian Americans that make them largely unaffected by these factors? If their low rates of participation remain unmoved, they risk being systematically neglected from the democratic processes of the government. This study hypothesizes that the deeply rooted Asian cultural values of respect for authority and hierarchy dampen defiance and encourage passivity, therefore causing Asian Americans who are closely tied to their Asian culture to be less politically active. This study will measure political participation through self-reported voting and registration, while using a series of variables to determine levels of engagement with Asian culture. The dataset used from National Asian American Survey captures Asian Americans’ political attitudes and behaviors during the Presidential elections of 2008.

Past research shows that white and wealthy men are the most prevalent donors to local and state political campaigns, maintaining political influence through ineffectively regulated systems thereby threatening the quality of American democracy. As regulation-based campaign finance reform has been unable to mitigate the influence of large donors in local campaigns, city councils and grassroots organizations have started to present incentive-based policies to provide average Americans with the means to donate, though few have actually implemented them. Budding reforms like that of the Democracy Voucher program in Seattle, though showing promise, demand the attention of researchers to analyze their efficacy. Through comparing both the demographics and the histories of political engagement between donors, program participants, and other voters, this study seeks to determine the initial success of the Democracy Voucher program in Seattle. It concludes that one can observe a minimal increase in donors and more diverse donors, suggesting that the Voucher Program was marginally effective in achieving its goals of diversifying the donor pool. This research contributes to the literature available to policy makers and other researchers interested in developing public campaign financing reforms at the municipal and, potentially, state level.

Environmentalism has often been considered a moral commitment. However, this paper investigates the hypothesis that environmentalism is not just a moral commitment, but a highly logical economic commitment. I argue that environmentalism is not contrary to economic motivations: instead, states fund their departments of ecology when they stand to gain economically from doing so. This paper compares the percentage of each state’s budget that went towards funding their ecology department to the tax revenue generated by two types of state resources: the outdoor recreation economy in each state and each state’s proven crude oil, shale gas, and natural gas reserves. When states receive more tax revenue from the outdoor recreation economy, they allocate a larger percentage of their budget to ecology departments. On the other hand, the presence of proven crude oil, shale gas, or natural gas reserves will decrease the amount of funding for state ecology departments because states generally gain more economically from the exploitation of those resources than from the outdoor recreation economy. Broader implications of this paper include the conclusion that the best way to ensure that states will be environmentally conscious is to make it economically advantageous to do so as states act primarily on economic incentives. This study uses data sets from Ballotpedia and American FactFinder and is supplemented with data from the National Conference of State Legislatures and the Outdoor Industry Association.