This dissertation consists of three parts that examine one of the most consequential areas of research in the presidency literature: presidential power. The first part, The Three Faces of Presidential Power: Legislative, Executive, and Rhetorical Leadership in the American Presidency, presents a conceptual framework based on the notion that presidential power has three distinct faces: a legislative one, an executive one, and a rhetorical one. It traces their origins and evolution and discusses how their institutionalization transformed the office of the presidency. It offers some preliminary observations about the way modern presidents may take advantage of these faces and introduces a research agenda for scholars to evaluate the exercise of presidential power using the framework presented here. It argues that the three faces of presidential power must be viewed in a complimentary manner, rather than in isolation from one another, and that successful presidential leadership is about skillfully and strategically taking advantage of all three faces. The second and third parts focus on the President’s ability to affect policy through executive means. Proclamations and the American Presidency (1789-2009) presents the most comprehensive dataset compiled by any scholar to date of all presidential proclamations issued from the George Washington through the George W. Bush administration. It surveys the proclamation landscape over the course of American political development and offers an empirical analysis of the way modern presi dents use the proclamation as a policy instrument. A Memo From The President: Presidential Memoranda and Executive Power in the United States examines the role of the presidential memorandum as an instrument of executive action. It introduces an original dataset of policy memoranda issued during the modern presidency and analyzes statistical patterns in their use. Using regression analysis, both parts conclude that few political, institutional, and contextual variables appear to affect the frequency with which presidents issue policy proclamations and memoranda. They offer empirical evidence to suggest, contrary to previous research on executive orders, that presidents are not necessarily increasing their use of executive directives to set policy by fiat and to bypass the traditional legislative process.

The Politbarometer has been conducted since 1977 on an almost monthly basis by the Research Group for Elections (Forschungsgruppe Wahlen) for the Second German Television (ZDF). Since 1990, this database has also been available for the new German states. The survey focuses on the opinions and attitudes of the voting population in the Federal Republic on current political topics, parties, politicians, and voting behavior. From 1990 to 1995 and from 1999 onward, the Politbarometer surveys were conducted separately in the eastern and western federal states (Politbarometer East and Politbarometer West). The separate monthly surveys of a year are integrated into a cumulative data set that includes all surveys of a year and all variables of the respective year. The Politbarometer short surveys, collected with varying frequency throughout the year, are integrated into the annual cumulation starting from 2003.

The official travel department, under the authority of the Directorate-General of the National Police, is responsible for security measures around the President of the Republic and senior French personalities, as well as the organisation of official travel. Archive records produced in connection with these missions are kept in the National Archives. The various detailed inventories have made it possible to draw up a structured and detailed chronological list of the travels of the Presidents of the Republic and the Prime Ministers since 1945.

This list of more than 2,500 trips in France and abroad does not claim to be exhaustive, but rather to offer a rather rich geographical and chronological panorama. The following are accessible:

• for the President of the Republic: 1,166 trips, 118 countries, for the period 1945-2008;

• for the Prime Minister: 1,342 trips, 71 countries, for the period 1964-2008.

The dataset made available consists of the following information:

• Function: President of the Republic or Prime Minister;

• Individual;

• Location: according to the content of the initial inventory;

• Standardised location: department or region for France;

• Countries;

• Start date;

• End date;

• URL(s) of the package leaflet;

• Rating(s);

• Initial Inventory Content: this field can provide additional information on the type of travel, the different stages of a trip (especially abroad), or even the mention of photographs.

A map access is proposed here, based on the contours of the column standard place (main sources used: Opendatasoft and angelodlfrtr).

The archives of the Official Travel Service available at the National Archives generally consist of the following documents: detailed travel schedule (sometimes printed brochure), order of official cars, table plan, safety notes and correspondence, press clippings. These data are to be supplemented with the archives of the photographic services of the Presidency of the Republic and the Prime Minister, partly digitised:

• photographic reports of Heads of State and Presidents of the Republic (1938-1959);

• photographic reports of Charles de Gaulle’s presidency;

• photographic reports of the presidency of Georges Pompidou;

• Prime Minister’s photographic service.

The data will be updated with subsequent archive payments from the Official Travel Service.

Update of 20/04/2023: addition of 102 entries (mainly travel abroad) for the years 2006 to 2008 (archive payment 20220621)

PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3A05707c1dc04a814129f751937a6ea56b08413546b18b351a85bc96da16a7f8b5 for complete metadata about this dataset.

This data set consists of digital data describing BLM National Conservation Lands or National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) in the State of Colorado. The data set identifies the geographic locations and boundaries of the NLCS lands throughout Colorado. These data represent the polygon features that show the boundaries for the NLCS National Monuments, National Conservation Areas and Similar Designations. Monuments encompass landscapes of tremendous beauty and diversity, ranging from rugged California coastline to vividly-hued desert canyons. The Antiquities Act of 1906 grants the President authority to designate national monuments in order to protect "objects of historic or scientific interest." While most national monuments are established by the President, Congress has also occasionally established national monuments protecting natural or historic features.

PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau practices "data suppression", filtering some block groups from demographic publication because they do not meet a population threshold. This practice...

TIME's Person of the Year hasn't always secured his or her place in the history books, but many honorees remain unforgettable: Gandhi, Khomeini, Kennedy, Elizabeth II, the Apollo 8 astronauts Anders, Borman and Lovell. Each has left an indelible mark on the world.TIME's choices for Person of the Year are often controversial. Editors are asked to choose the person or thing that had the greatest impact on the news, for good or ill — guidelines that leave them no choice but to select a newsworthy, not necessarily praiseworthy, cover subject. Controversial choices have included Adolf Hitler (1938), Joseph Stalin (1939, 1942), and Ayatullah Khomeini (1979).TIME's choices for Person of the Year are often politicians and statesmen. Eleven American presidents, from FDR to George W. Bush, have graced the Person of the Year cover, many of them more than once. As commander in chief of one of the world's greatest nations, it's hard not to be a newsmaker.ContentThis dataset includes a record for every Time Magazine cover which has honored an individual or group as "Men of the Year", "Women of the Year", "Person of the Year" or "Persons of the Year".AcknowledgementsThe data was scraped from Time Magazine's website.

The agency insulation data set above has been expanded for event history analysis. In this expanded data set there are multiple observations for each agency to allow for the inclusion of time-varying covariates in parametric models of agency duration or hazard rates. This means, for example, that an agency created in 1946 and still in existence in 1997 will have 52 observations. In addition to a unique agency identifier and a variable indicating the year of observation, each observation includes the date the observation started, the date the observation ended, and the length of time the agency has been alive. Each observation also includes state variables, 0 for alive, and 1 for terminated. A more complete description of the data is included in the codebook below.

Us Senators serving Macon-Bibb County.The two Senators that serve the State of Georgia are Johnny Isakson and David Perdue.The United States Senate is the upper chamber of the United States Congress, which along with the United States House of Representatives—the lower chamber—comprise the legislature of the United States.The composition and powers of the Senate are established by Article One of the United States Constitution. The Senate is composed of senators, each of whom represents a single state in its entirety, with each state being equally represented by two senators, regardless of its population, serving staggered terms of six years; with fifty states presently in the Union, there are 100 U.S. Senators. From 1789 until 1913, Senators were appointed by legislatures of the states they represented; following the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913, they are now popularly elected. The Senate chamber is located in the north wing of the Capitol, in Washington, D.C.As the upper house, the Senate has several powers of advice and consent which are unique to it; these include the ratification of treaties and the confirmation of Cabinet secretaries, Supreme Court justices, federal judges, other federal executive officials, flag officers, regulatory officials, ambassadors, and other federal uniformed officers. In addition to these, in cases wherein no candidate receives a majority of electors for Vice President, the duty befalls upon the Senate to elect one of the top two recipients of electors for that office. It further has the responsibility of conducting trials of those impeached by the House. The Senate is widely considered both a more deliberative and more prestigious body than the House of Representatives due to its longer terms, smaller size, and statewide constituencies, which historically led to a more collegial and less partisan atmosphere.The presiding officer of the Senate is the Vice President of the United States, who is President of the Senate. In the Vice President's absence, the President Pro Tempore, who is customarily the senior member of the party holding a majority of seats, presides over the Senate. In the early 20th century, the practice of majority and minority parties electing their floor leaders began, although they are not constitutional officers.

The 2009 Digest provides a historical record of key legal developments in 2009. Legal Adviser Harold Hongju Koh summarized the contents of the 2009 Digest, stating in part: In 2009, as this volume reflects, a new United States administration, under the Presidency of Barack Obama, took office and pursued important initiatives demonstrating its respect for the rule of law. For instance, the United States has sought to ensure its detention operations, detainee prosecutions, and uses of force are all consistent with the laws of war. In one of his first actions after taking office, President Barack Obama unequivocally banned the use of torture as an instrument of U.S. policy and instructed that all interrogations of detainees be conducted in accordance with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and with the revised Army Field Manual. The executive branch also articulated a revised, narrower legal basis for its authority to detain individuals, based on the 2001 statutory Authorization for the Use of Military Force ("AUMF"), and made clear that its interpretation of the AUMF would be informed by the law of war. The administration also worked with Congress to improve the legal framework governing military commissions. The United States also pursued initiatives to renew the rule of law by reviving our treaty and agreement making process. For example, in 2009, we deposited or exchanged instruments of ratification to bring into force more than 70 advice and consent treaties, which is an all-time annual record for the United States. Among these treaties were crucial law of war instruments, tax treaties, an environmental treaty, and law enforcement treaties, including landmark agreements with the European Union on extradition and mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, which entered into force in early 2010. In addition, we negotiated a new treaty to replace the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms ("START"),.

Summary Since 2017, GEO shares have fallen sharply from $30 to ~$8.50 per share, at one point below even the book value of $8.19 per share. President Biden recently signed an executive order that banned the renewal of Department of Justice contracts with private prisons, but the effect on GEO is way way less than the market thinks. The border crisis renders ICE dependent on GEO for capacity, making it near impossible for ICE to cut ties in the near future. With a market cap of just $1.02 Billion, GEO has the potential to increase 2-3x in the next 6-12 months. cropped image of african american prisoner reading book LightFieldStudios/iStock via Getty Images Thesis GEO Group (GEO) is a deeply mispriced provider of privately-owned prisons, falling from a price of $30+ in early 2017 to the current price of $8.50 per share. GEO has fallen primarily as a result of concerns about legislation regarding private prisons, a canceled dividend, the likely shift away from a REIT structure, and high levels of debt. These overblown concerns have created a pretty solid structural opportunity. kmosby1992@gmail.com password kmosby1992@gmail.com Subscribe Company overview GEO operates in several segments, such as GEO care, International services, and U.S. Secure Services. Source: Annual report 1 - U.S. Secure Services U.S. Secure services account for the majority of their revenue, 67%, and includes their correctional facilities and processing centers. Secure services manage 74,000 beds across 58 facilities as of the 2020 annual report. GEO transport is included in U.S. secure services, but we felt it warranted its own paragraph. GEO transport provides secure transportation services to government agencies. With 400 customized, U.S. Department of Transportation compliant vehicles, GEO transport drove more than 14 million miles in 2020. 2 - GEO Care GEO care is a series of programs designed to reintegrate inmates and troubled youth into society. They operate through reentry centers, non-residential reentry programs, and youth treatment programs. GEO care operates approximately 4-dozen reentry centers, which provide housing, employment assistance, rehabilitation, substance abuse counseling, and vocational and education programs to current and former inmates. Through their reentry segment, they operate more than 70 non-residential reentry programs that provide behavioral assessments, treatment, supervision, and education. GEO care made up 23% of total 2020 revenue. Geo monitoring is included in GEO care. Through a wholly-owned subsidiary, BI Inc., GEO offers monitoring technology for parolees, probationers, pretrial defendants, and individuals involved in the immigration process. As of the 2020 annual report, BI helps monitor ~155,000 individuals across all 50 states. 3 - International operations International operations made up only 10% of revenue in 2020, but it is showing signs of growth. GEO recently landed a 10-year contract with the United kingdom, which they expect to total $760 million in revenue over the course of the contract. They also landed an 8-year contract with the Scottish Prison Service, which grants an annualized revenue of $39 million and has a 4-year renewal period. Why is GEO Mispriced? While there are several reasons for the dramatic reduction in share price over the last 4 years, the main reason was the looming fear of legislation destroying privately owned prisons. To a degree, this fear materialized on January 26th, 2021, when President Biden signed an Executive Order ordering the Attorney General not to renew any Department of Justice contracts with "privately operated criminal detention facilities." At face value, this order seems as though it would have a devastating impact on GEO. However, only ~25% of total revenue is impacted in any form by this order. The executive order only concerns branches of the Department of Justice. Only 2 DOJ branches have business connections with GEO, the US Marshals (USMS), and the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Source: Annual report It is imperative to note that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), is not a branch of the DOJ and is therefore unaffected by this order. Individual states, as well as other countries, are unaffected by this order Bureau of Prisons GEO currently holds several agreements with the BOP relating to operations of prisons across the country. As of year-end 2020, agreements involving the BOP accounted for 14% of total revenue. All revenue from the BOP will not disappear, as the executive order does not impact reentry facilities. In 2Q21, after the executive order was made, GEO renewed 5 BOP reentry contracts. GEO even scored a new contract with the BOP, regarding the construction and operation of a new facility in Tampa. United States Marshal Service The United States Marshal Service does not own o... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3A900514e651e0d2c774ad90f358c9db90884c2baf98c068f470b290b3c4b3103a for complete metadata about this dataset.

Party leaders have become more powerful and autonomous actors in recent years, by developing a direct and personal relationship with citizens. As anticipated in the United States (Lowi 1985), the rise of the “personal leader” seems to have occurred in many European democracies, both in old parties and in more recently formed parties, with a widespread tendency for them to be promoted and controlled by individual leaders. Nevertheless party leadership remains quite a neglected theme in political science. Through a dataset including approximately five hundred party presidents in thirteen democracies, this article focuses on the personalization of party leadership by comparing Italy with other Western countries. More particularly, new procedures for the selection of party chairs, the centralization of power in political parties, and the new role of party leaders in the legislative/governmental arena are analysed, given their importance to such a process. The article summarizes new data on the party leaders’ characteristics, with regards to their political backgrounds, how they are elected, how long they stay in office, and whether they become prime minister or enter the executive. In this way, we are able to see how some new parties are created from the outset as highly personalized and centralized parties (Forza Italia being the paradigmatic case), while other older parties have also evolved in a personalized direction.

BackgroundThe recommendation of universal diagnostic testing before malaria treatment aimed to address the problem of over-treatment with artemisinin-based combination therapy and the heightened risk of selection pressure and drug resistance and the use of malaria rapid diagnostic test (MRDT) was a key strategy, particularly among primary healthcare (PHC) workers whose access to and use of other forms of diagnostic testing were virtually absent. However, the use of MRDT can only remedy over-treatment when health workers respond appropriately to negative MRDT results by not prescribing anti-malarial drugs. This study assessed the use of MRDT and anti-malarial drug prescription practices, and the predictors, among PHC workers in Ebonyi state, Nigeria.MethodsWe conducted an analytical cross-sectional questionnaire survey, among consenting PHC workers involved in the diagnosis and treatment of malaria, from January 15, 2020 to February 5, 2020. Data was collected via structured self-administered questionnaire and analysed using descriptive statistics and bivariate and multivariate generalized estimating equations.ResultsOf the 490 participants surveyed: 81.4% usually/routinely used MRDT for malaria diagnosis and 18.6% usually used only clinical symptoms; 78.0% used MRDT for malaria diagnosis for all/most of their patients suspected of having malaria in the preceding month while 22.0% used MRDT for none/few/some; 74.9% had good anti-malarial drug prescription practice; and 68.0% reported appropriate response to negative MRDT results (never/rarely prescribed anti-malarial drugs for the patients) while 32.0% reported inappropriate response (sometimes/often/always prescribed anti-malarial drugs). The identified predictor(s): of the use of MRDT was working in health facilities supported by the United States’ President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI-supported health facilities); of good anti-malarial drug prescription practice were having good opinion about MRDT, having good knowledge about malaria diagnosis and MRDT, being a health attendant, working in PMI-supported health facilities, and increase in age; and of appropriate response to negative MRDT results was having good opinion about MRDT.ConclusionsThe evidence indicate the need for, and highlight factors to be considered by, further policy actions and interventions for optimal use of MRDT and anti-malarial drug prescription practices among the PHC workers in Ebonyi state, Nigeria, and similar settings.

The Enslaved Community of President James Monroe project began with the Black History Committee of the Friends of the Thomas Balch Library in Leesburg, Loudoun County, Virginia. James Monroe, the 5th president of the United States, owned plantations in Albemarle and Loudoun Counties in Virginia, and he made his Loudoun property, Oak Hill, his retirement home after his second presidential term ended. The BHC wanted to learn more about the people enslaved there. A small group of independent researchers organized, created a research plan, and began their work in 2007, in preparation for a Friends fundraising event at Oak Hill. Research continued through 2011 and is done sporadically at present as new information is uncovered. The dataset contains extracted information about the people enslaved by Monroe and his family, including daughters Eliza and her husband George Hay; daughter Maria and her husband Samuel Gouverneur; the Hay’s daughter Hortensia Monroe Hay Rogers; Monroe’s uncle Joseph Jones; and Monroe’s brother Andrew.

Project Summary: The book for which this data collection was generated seeks to explain why democracies and authoritarian regimes have emerged and then survived or fallen in Latin America from 1945 to 2005. The more specific goal of the data collection is to assess the impact of normative orientations towards democracy and radical policy preferences on the likelihood of democratic transitions and democratic breakdowns. Most theories postulate that regimes survive or fall depending on the behavior of political actors. As the authors tested hypotheses based on competing theories, they became convinced that actors’ normative preferences about democracy and dictatorship and their policy preferences were indeed crucial variables to understand why democracies and dictatorships emerge and then survive or break down. They found that normative regime preferences and radicalism, together with international conditions, are the most important predictors for democratic emergence and survival in Latin America. Data Abstract: The absence of systematic historical measures of normative regime preferences (ideological support for democracy or authoritarianism) and of policy radicalism for major political actors led the authors to commission a set of reports covering all Latin American countries after World War II up to 2010 The reports were produced between 2008 and 2013 with the help of 19 research assistants (RAs) by archival research and synthesis of existing material (notes based on secondary sources subsequently integrated into country reports). The data collection includes all of these reports as well as the coding rules guiding their production. For eighteen of the twenty countries, the coding of political actors covers the period from 1944 until 2010; for Argentina and El Salvador reports reach back to 1916 and 1927, respectively. The data are organized by country (documents for Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela) and by administration (sections within documents). For most administrations, a limited number of actors (between two and ten) were the decisive political players. The list always includes the president (except for a few puppet presidents), political parties, trade unions, military factions, social movements, and other powerful organizations. For 290 presidential administrations, the dataset has 1460 actors including 573 parties, party coalitions, and party factions; 327 presidents and the organizations that are relatively subordinate to them (such as their parties under democracies and almost always the military under military dictatorships); 175 militaries, military factions, and military organizations; 82 business organizations; 56 guerrilla organizations; 53 popular and civil society organizations; 52 labor unions and federations; 52 powerful individuals who were not the president; 27 churches; 22 social movements; 16 paramilitary groups; and a smaller number of other kinds of actors. The authors identified the actors’ political alignments vis-à-vis the incumbent president by coding whether they were the government or government allies, members of the opposition, or neutral or divided with regards to the administration. Based on multiple historical sources, country reports discuss and code three variables for each political actor: its normative preference for democracy, its normative preference for dictatorship, and its policy radicalism/moderation. The coding rules for normative preferences for democracy and dictatorship are designed to distinguish between instrumental and normative reasons for supporting regimes. Files Description: Twenty country reports, divided into sections corresponding to the administrations in office during 1944-2010, with additional administrations for Argentina (1916-1930) and El Salvador (1927-1943). Each section (administration or period for long-lasting administrations) contains a sub-section for the actors mentioned above. An additional table summarizes the profile of all political actors discussed for each administration period. For each actor, the report provides brief narratives involving qualitative assessment of three attributes: (1) The actor’s normative support for democracy. The actor’s normative support for dictatorship; (2) The actor’s degree of radicalism on policy issues; (3) Historical sources referenced for each document are listed at the end of each respective country report.

Behavior at the polls, stand on the nationalities problem and questions on the political system. Topics: Region; nationality; time of moving; possession of a nationality document; belonging to religious communities; attitude to religion; party membership; familiarity with the principles of nominating candidates and voting; sources of information regarding political parties and the election; personal election interest and that assumed in personal surroundings; assumed election fraud; voting intent regarding candidate for president and party; most important reasons for possibly not participating in the election; personal significance of election result; voting decision regarding the candidates for president, parties of the ´state list´ and the candidates of one´s own election precinct; most important reasons for voting decision; preferred political parties for a coalition with preferred party; personal voting decision to prevent unacceptable parties; areas of greatest social inequality; social values represented by one´s preferred party; solidarity with the nation due to language, religion, tradition, history, culture, economic and political interests; self-classification on a left-right continuum; most important social problems of the country; stand on freedom of speech, the right to demonstrate, violent solution of conflicts; the role of the opposition; salience of interests of the nation; constitution; relationship of president, parliament and government; balance of power between central government and regions in the country; preferred political and cultural rights of the Serbian minority after the war; future relationship of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia; political and economic cooperation with other countries; role of the state in the economy; necessity of an opposition for the functioning of democracy; influence of the government on mass-media; participation of trade unions in the development of Croatian economic policies; stand on abortion; relationship of government and church; satisfaction with president Tudjman, the parliament (Sabor) and the government of Manolic and Gregurica; preferred form of government; avoidance of a war; consideration of ecological and political interests in development of the country; energy consumption and use of new energy sources; significance of tradition, nation, authority, nationalism, freedom of the sciences, church, individual freedom and national interests; degree of acceptance of social contacts with members of other nations; general contentment with life; satisfaction with residence, financial situation and social position; extent to which informed about election predictions of the opinion polls and their influence on one´s own voting decision; election memory; earlier membership in communist party. Wahlverhalten, Haltung zum Nationalitätenproblem und Fragen zum politischen System. Themen: Region; Nationalität; Wohnsitz; Zeitpunkt des Zuzuges; Besitz eines Staatsangehörigkeitsdokumentes; Zugehörigkeit zu Religionsgemeinschaften; Einstellung zur Religion; Parteimitgliedschaft; Informiertheit über die Grundsätze der Wahl und der Kandidatenaufstellung; Informationsquellen bezüglich politischer Parteien und der Wahl; eigenes und im persönlichen Umfeld vermutetes Wahlinteresse; vermuteter Wahlbetrug; Wahlabsicht bezüglich Präsidentschaftskandidat und Partei; wichtigste Gründe für eine mögliche Nichtwahlbeteiligung; persönliche Bedeutung des Wahlausgangs; Wahlentscheidung bezüglich Präsidentschaftskandidaten, Parteien der "State List" und der Kandidaten des eigenen Wahlbezirks; wichtigste Gründe für Wahlentscheidung; bevorzugte politische Parteien für eine Koalition mit präferierter Partei; eigene Wahlentscheidung zur Verhinderung inakzeptabler Parteien; Bereiche größter sozialer Ungleichheit; von der präferierten Partei vertretenen sozialen Werte; Verbundenheit mit der Nation aufgrund von Sprache, Religion, Tradition, Geschichte, Kultur, ökonomischer und politischer Interessen, Links-Rechts-Selbsteinstufung; wichtigste gesellschaftliche Probleme des Landes; Haltung zu Meinungsfreiheit, Demonstrationsrecht, gewaltsamen Lösung von Konflikten, Rolle der Opposition, Stellenwert der Interessen der Nation; Verfassung; Verhältnis von Präsident, Parlament und Regierung; Machtverhältnisse zwischen Zentralstaat und Regionen im Land; präferierte politische und kulturelle Rechte der serbischen Minderheit nach dem Krieg; zukünftiges Verhältnis von Bosnien-Herzegowina und Kroatien; politische und ökonomische Kooperation mit anderen Staaten; Rolle des Staates in der Wirtschaft; Notwendigkeit einer Opposition für das Funktionieren der Demokratie; Einfluß des Staates auf die Massenmedien; Beteiligung der Gewerkschaften bei der Entwicklung der kroatischen ökonomischen Politik; Haltung zum Schwangerschaftsabbruch; Verhältnis von Staat und Kirche; Zufriedenheit mit Präsident (Franjo Tudmann), Parlament (Sabor) und Regierung von Josip Manolic und von Franje Gregurica; präferierte Staatsform; Vermeidbarkeit des Krieges; Berücksichtigung von ökologischen und politischen Interessen bei der Entwicklung des Landes; Energieverbrauch und Nutzung neuer Energiequellen; Bedeutung von Tradition, Nation, Autorität, Nationalismus, Freiheit der Wissenschaften, Kirche, individueller Freiheit und nationalen Interessen; Grad der Akzeptanz sozialer Kontakte zu Angehörigen anderer Nationen; allgemeine Lebenszufriedenheit; Zufriedenheit mit der Wohnung, der finanziellen Situation und der sozialen Position; Informiertheit über Wahlprognosen der Meinungsumfragen und deren Einfluß auf die eigene Wahlentscheidung; Wahlrückerinnerung; frühere Mitgliedschaft in kommunistischer Partei.

The way one sees oneself and political consciousness of jurists in the FRG. Topics: year of start of profession; duration and type of current professional position; description of types of activity as well as field of activity; classification of weekly number of working hours in court and at home; description of career course; judgement on prestige of judges; assessment of their function regarding state and society; professional image and the way one sees oneself as judge; aspects of judicial independence; dependence of administration of justice; support by political authorities or media; bureaucratization of the judiciary and complexity of law; judgement on the promotion process and the most important promotion factors; judgement on various internals of judiciary organization; mutual consultation with colleagues; problems of judicial decision; attitude to problems of judiciary reform; judgement on the position of the Federal Constitutional Court; attitude to the political structure of institutions and to problems of domestic as well as foreign policy; attitude to opposition, the party system and the political system of the FRG in general; party preference and membership; attitude to statements on economic policy and actions by jurists; media usage; social surroundings and social origins; financial circumstances and residential status; court size; job satisfaction. Demography: age; sex; marital status; year of marriage; number of children; characteristics of spouse; religious denomination; frequency of church attendance; income; household income; assets; party membership; social origins; city size; refugee status; memberships; doctorate. Interviewer rating: willingness of respondent to cooperate; presence of other persons during interview; reliability of respondent; length of interview; sex of interviewer. Das Selbstverständnis und politische Bewußtsein von Juristen in der BRD. Themen: Berufseintrittsjahr; Dauer und Art der jetzigen beruflichen Stellung; Beschreibung der Tätigkeitsarten sowie des Tätigkeitsfelds; Aufgliederung der wöchentlichen Arbeitsstunden im Gericht und zu Hause; Beschreibung des Karriereverlaufs; Beurteilung des Ansehens der Richter; Einschätzung ihrer Funktion gegenüber Staat und Gesellschaft; Berufsbild und Selbstverständnis als Richter; Aspekte der richterlichen Unabhängigkeit; Abhängigkeit von Justizverwaltung; Unterstützung durch politische Instanzen oder Medien; Bürokratisierung der Justiz und Kompliziertheit des Rechts; Beurteilung des Beförderungswesens und der wichtigsten Beförderungsfaktoren; Beurteilung verschiedener Interna der Justizorganisation; gegenseitige Beratung mit Kollegen; Probleme richterlicher Entscheidung; Einstellung zu Problemen der Justizreform; Beurteilung der Stellung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts; Einstellung zum politischen Institutionengefüge und zu Problemen der Innen- sowie Außenpolitik; Einstellung zu Opposition, Parteiensystem und zum politischen System der BRD allgemein; Parteipräferenz und Mitgliedschaft; Einstellung zu wirtschaftspolitischen Stellungnahmen und Aktionen von Juristen; Mediennutzung; soziales Umfeld und soziale Herkunft; Vermögensverhältnisse und Wohnstatus; Gerichtsgröße; Arbeitsplatzzufriedenheit. Demographie: Alter; Geschlecht; Familienstand; Eheschließungsjahr; Kinderzahl; Charakteristika des Ehepartners; Konfession; Kirchgangshäufigkeit; Einkommen; Haushaltseinkommen; Vermögen; Parteimitgliedschaft; Soziale Herkunft; Ortsgröße; Flüchtlingsstatus; Mitgliedschaften; Promotion. Interviewerrating: Kooperationsbereitschaft des Befragten; Anwesenheit anderer Personen beim Interview; Zuverlässigkeit des Befragten; Interviewdauer; Geschlecht des Interviewers. Sample The 792 selected judges for life were comprised of: 1. a census among the judges of the Higher Federal Court and the presidents of the superior courts, 2. a 20-percent random sample among the judges for life (without presidents and delegated judges) at the superior courts as well as 3. a 10-percent random sample among the judges (including those delegated to higher courts), at state and district courts. According to the quota procedure 105 judges for a probationary period at the district and state courts were selected. The sample of a so-called ´control group´ consisting of 132 lawyers and 159 administrative jurists was conducted according to a random procedure. Die 792 ausgewählten Richter auf Lebenszeit setzten sich zusammen aus: 1. einer Totalerhebung unter den Richtern der Oberen Bundesgericht und den Präsidenten der Oberlandesgerichte, 2. einer 20%igen Zufallsstichprobe aus den Richtern auf Lebenszeit (ohne Präsidenten und abgeordnete Richter) an den Oberlandesgerichten sowie 3. einer 10%igen Zufallsstichprobe aus den Richtern (einschließlic an höhere Gerichte abgeordnete), an Land- und Amtsgerichten. Nach dem Quotenverfahren wurden 105 Richter auf Probe an den Amts- und Landgerichten ausgewählt. Die Auswahl einer sogenannten ´Kontrollgruppe´, bestehend aus 132 Anwälten und 159 Verwaltungsjuristen erfolgte nach einem Zufallsverfahren.