Skip to main content Skip to navigation
The Foley Institute for Public Policy and Public Service

Fall 2022


Use the key word search function  at the left of this page to find specific events

“After Dobbs, the elections and the Court’s future direction”

Tuesday, September 6

On September 6, the institute kicked off its midterm speaker series by hosting Stefanie Lindquist, professor of law and political science at Arizona State University. She gave a talk on the Dobbs decision’s impact on public trust in the Supreme Court and subsequent elections.

Professor Lindquist emphasized that judicial activism is most controversial when it overturns longstanding precedent or makes an ideological ruling. The Supreme Court should instead mix restraint and activism, largely staying out of hotly legislated topics that congress debates while taking steps to protect minority groups that have less access to the political process.

She argued that recent decisions on the EPA, separation of church and state, and gun rights have undermined this rule. Groups that have ample representation in the political process, like religious organizations and large companies, received protection in these rulings thereby damaging the public’s view of the Supreme Court.

Lindquist suggested that the Dobbs decision was hotly contested because it both overturned longstanding precedent in the Roe v. Wade ruling and because it was made with ideological motivations. Lindquist stressed that this decision undermined public faith in the Supreme Court. She stated that public approval of the Supreme Court had fallen dramatically as a result of the decision.

She concluded her talk by noting that the Supreme Court was moving in an uncertain direction amidst hot partisanship and lack of public faith in democracy. The response to the Dobbs decision demonstrated a continuing trend of declining trust in political institutions seen across the United States in recent years.

“Who’s going to win? Predicting election results”

Tuesday, September 6

On Tuesday September 13, Kyle Kondik, managing editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball, gave a talk on predicting the 2022 midterms.

Kondik began his talk by discussing a mistake he made predicting the 2018 election cycle in Washington’s 5th congressional district to illustrate the difficulties in predicting election results before the results are tallied. In that election, an unexpectedly close primary was followed by a strong win for incumbent Cathy McMorris Rogers.

He noted that growing partisanship eroded the presence of ticket splitting, where states elect significant numbers of republicans and democrats to their house and senate delegation. Instead, states are becoming increasingly mono-political, often electing only one party in significant numbers to powerful positions in their state.

In all midterm elections, presidential approval plays a large role in determining the success of the incumbent political party. Biden’s approval rating remains low despite surging numbers, and Kondik suggested that democrats may well see a significant political hit from the president’s sagging popularity.

In 2022, strong inflation and the lingering COVID pandemic have hurt the Democratic Party’s likelihood of maintaining control of congress, whereas the controversial Dobbs ruling and wild card republican nominees might motivate democratic voters to turn out. Early initial generic ballots report a thin advantage to the democrats over republicans, and the special house election in Alaska gave democrats a surprise win. Essentially, republicans are expected to at least regain control of the house with control of the senate resting on a coinflip.

Kondik ended his talk by mentioning that regardless of the 2022 midterms, the 2024 senate races clearly favor republicans as many vulnerable blue senate states are up for reelection.

Populism and Democracy in Central Europe”

Tuesday, September 20

On September 20, the Foley Institute welcomed Miro Hacek, head of the political science and public policy department at the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia, to give a talk on the effect of rising populism in central Europe.

Hacek began his talk by defining populism, where anti-establishment rhetoric is employed to play to the general public to gain or maintain power. While not inherently harmful, it has been used recently to push anti-immigrant and authoritarian ideas in Central Europe. Mistrust of major political institutions leads outsiders to attack the political mainstream, fueling radical ideologies.

Populists’ typically take power at a time when trust in democracy is low, and democracy often backslides as populists attack major political institutions. The 2008 financial crisis saw a wave of anti-European Union sentiment, giving right wing populists a prime opportunity to gain power.

Hacek’s home country of Slovenia was used as an example of populism failing to promote stable democratic leadership. He analyzed several waves of populist elections where shaky coalitions quickly collapsed and lead to new party’s taking over.

Central and European nations ultimately adopt populism because of their traumatic history of authoritarianism, growing economic uncertainty, the migrant crisis, social media, and lack of political incentive to collaborate with other political parties.

“Broken promises, close elections and party failure in Congress”

September 27

On September 26, the Foley Institute welcomed Princeton political science professor Frances Lee to discuss the impact political gridlock and close elections have on democracy.

Lee began her talk by noting that the 2022 midterms are unlikely to produce a major shift away from the gridlock and thin majorities seen in the past three decades. Landslides have become less common, states are flipping from party to party less, and divided government has become the norm. Increasing competition and parity has been seen since 1980, driving parties to differentiate and demonize one another.

1980 was a turning point in the decent into political polarization, and the Ronald Reagan presidency galvanized the conservative wing of the Republican Party, which shifted the party to the right. In response, the Democratic Party doubled down on their message, and became increasingly combative.

The shift towards a more competitive partisan environment led parties to differentiate themselves from one another and target their base with party messaging. The 1994 and 2006 midterms are iconic examples of parties laying out hardline political positions in opposition to their rival party. Lee says that these strategies defeat bipartisanship, as any work done with the opposition party actively helps the majority stay in power.

Lee noted that these action coalitions often lead to party failures, as parties ultimately failed to unify around a specific policy line. She explained that the electoral unity created by standing against the other party does not heal intraparty differences on key pieces of legislation.

She ended her talk by noting that parties rarely succeed in enacting the legislation they promised to enact if elected, creating a cycle of failed ruling coalitions that collapse and give way to more faulty promises.

“The next congress, what legislation can pass?”

October 4

On Tuesday October 4, University of Utah associate professor of political science James Curry delivered a talk on how the 118th congress will pass its legislative agenda after the upcoming 2022 midterms.

Curry opened his talk by reminding the audience how political parties routinely under-deliver on their election promises. Before the 2020 election, Democrats promised sweeping reforms to child welfare coverage, immigration policy, gender identity protections, and voting rights. While some policy change was made serious progressive reform was not achieved.

Many would point to this as yet another example of congress’s declining efficiency. While the total number of laws passed has declined since the 1940’s, the total amount of statutes and regulations passed by congress has actually increased. The use of omnibus legislation, where multiple issues are packaged into one law, means that congress has increased congressional law making ability since the 1940’s.

Bizarrely enough, despite the fever pitch of partisanship observed in modern American politics, bipartisanship remains statistically similar over the past five decades with much the same party support on overall legislation. Curry argues that congress still attempts to make compromises on key pieces of legislation, with the majority party seeking support from the minority party by removing radical proposals from legislation or incorporating the opposition party’s priorities into new laws.

Curry’s research found that ‘steam rolling’, where a majority party ignores the minority party, is actually quite rare, accounting for only 14 percent of passed majority legislation since 1985. Recently, Democrats used a combination of strategies to enact their agenda, steamrolling republicans on Covid-19 policy, but largely seeking broad support for their ideas and backing down on controversial legislation.

Essentially, while parties may be growing more hardline in their stances, the overall need for majority parties to compromise and seek broad support for their policies has not disappeared.

“Abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, and  the courts”

October 11

On Tuesday, October 11, the Foley Institute welcomed back Alison Gash, professor of political science at the University of Oregon, to give a talk on the future of abortion and LGBTQ+ rights.

Gash began her talk by emphasizing the severe consequences of the Dobbs ruling for abortion and LGBTQ+ rights. A precedent has been set by this decision that could be used to further roll back LGBTQ+ rights.

The 14th Amendment is of vital importance for the legal arguments around Abortion and LGBTQ+ rights by establishing the principles of due process and equal protection. In order for states to pass laws that possibly violate equal protection clauses, they must pass ‘strict scrutiny’, proving that the law serves a compelling interest to the public good and that the law is narrowly tailored with no other alternatives.

Any laws passed at a state level that target historically discriminated minorities like people of color, women, religious groups, or the LGBTQ+ community must pass strict scrutiny in order to be implemented. Gash notes that strict scrutiny has not been applied to ‘Don’t say gay laws’, much to the dismay of many LGBTQ+ advocates.

Also important to the debate on LGBTQ+ rights and abortion is the ‘right to privacy’ set by several landmark Supreme Court rulings like Griswold v Connecticut. Though not enumerated in the U.S. Constitution, the ‘right to privacy’ has become an important implied right to ones own bodily autonomy and intimate relationships.

The Dobbs decision has ominous implication for the ‘right to privacy’, with it remaining unclear whether the right to privacy has been revoked by the Supreme Court. With these rights in legal jeopardy, there is a wider opening for states to pass laws that target LGBTQ+ rights, like trans athlete bans, parental notification bills, and bans on gender-affirming care.

Taking on Powerful Corporations”

October 18

On Tuesday October 18, Attorney General Bob Ferguson gave a talk on his office’s pursuit of legal action against Facebook for violating campaign finance law.

Ferguson began his talk by explaining that his office serves the people of Washington in civil law, with decisions and consultations made regardless of external political pressure. The office of attorney general is currently pursuing legal action against Meta (Facebook) for violation of campaign finance law. Washington’s campaign finance laws were first established in the 1970’s with overwhelming public support. Under the law, political advertisements were required to publicly disclosure to who was paying for ads and how long they would run.

Facebook (Meta) violated this policy by refusing to disclose online ads posted to its social media pages and continued to post non-disclosed ads to its website against state law after it had received a warning. Facebook then filed suite against the state of Washington, going as far to argue that the entirety of Washington’s campaign finance laws were unconstitutional.

In the upcoming case ruling, the stakes for election integrity and public faith in democracy are quite high. Should Facebook win, Washington’s voter backed election laws would be rolled back, and political action committees would be able to pump money into elections without any accountability. In light of the spread of conspiracy theories relating to the 2020 election, Ferguson argues that now more than ever election integrity must be protected.

Ferguson also mentioned his work bringing suite to opioid manufacturers, where 9 states including Washington, filed a 1.6-billion-dollar suite against the misleading marketing tactics large companies used to push prescriptions to doctors. While this suite does not bring true justice to the families who lost children and relatives to addiction, it is an important to ensuring future drug epidemics do not break out.

“Redistricting, election laws, and the midterms”

October 25

On Tuesday October 25, Paul Gronke, Professor of Political Science at Reed College, discussed how election administration and election laws affect United States elections and the midterms.

Gronke began his talk by discussing the differences in the United States and United Kingdom’s methods of selecting the President and Prime Minister. Gronke noted that in either system, the likelihood that one vote would determine the outcome of a UK general election or US presidential election was almost zero. He argued that the time costs of voting are an important factor in determining voter turnout.

When voting by mail was implemented in Oregon, it was supposed to increase voter turnout by reducing the amount of time it took to vote. While turnout increased in the years following its adoption, it remained similar to turnout seen during the late 60’s.

Gronke explained that election laws are deeply affected by federalism, with responsibility shared by both federal and state actors alike. United States elections are run by over 8000 different jurisdictions, each with there own rules for elections. Registration is also complex, with a multitiered system of registration, vote tabulation, and counting.

He ended his talk by discussing the deep polarization of voting laws and the use of partisan rhetoric to enact reform. He noted the rise of ‘the voting wars’, where policies like electric voter registration, felon disenfranchisement, and voter ID laws became political tools.

“A Conversation With Cathy McMorris Rogers”

October 27

On Thursday October 27, the Foley Institute welcomed Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers for a conversation on her work in congress and on current events.

Congresswoman Rodgers opened by discussing her childhood in Kettle Falls Washington and her early education in college. She was appointed to Washington’s State House in her 20’s to represent Northeastern Washington, where she served for ten years, eventually becoming the House Minority Leader. In 2004 , she ran for congress to fill the vacant seat left by George Nethercutt and was elected to the 5th district of Washington. She now sits as the ranking Republican on the Energy and Commerce committee.

The Energy and Commerce Committee has existed since 1795, with Congresswoman Rodgers becoming its ranking member in 2021. While her committee may not receive much media attention, it nevertheless serves a critical purpose and requires a willingness to overcome differences and legislate.

She noted that while current circumstances surrounding the economy and mental health may be bleak, there is hope for the future and opportunities to improve upon.

Specific legislation highlighted included regulations on corporate use of private data collection and sales to 3rd party entities, with a ban on sales to advertising firms of personal data belonging to those under 17. She discussed the need for energy independence to mitigate the effects of oil embargos from foreign powers, and argued that Washington should expand upon its use of hydroelectric energy.

“Election Norms and Democracy”

November 1

On Tuesday November 1, Eric Groenendyk, professor of Political Science at Memphis University, and President of the Political Phycology section of the American Political Science Association, gave a talk on election norms and democracy.

Groenendyk argued that ideology acts less like a set of rigid dogmatic beliefs and more like a group identity. Similarly to how sports fans take offense to another teams jersey, ideological groups take offense to those who break ranks on policy positions. He argues that ideology leads to ‘norm conformity’, where voters refuse to break ranks with political elites.

Modern researchers quickly discovered that the public does not view their political beliefs or actions through ideological terms like liberal or conservative. Instead, the public often changes its opinions frequently and generally operates without a stable political perspective.

He discussed his research on norm conformity, where research participants were asked to define the policy norms within their party and identify whether their views aligned with their ideology. His study found that liberals and conservatives frequently break ranks with their ideology, but are often unaware they are doing so. Despite this, Groenendyk found that those surveyed who broke with their ideology, a third did so knowingly.

Groenendyk ended his talk by noting that while citizens do knowingly break ranks with their ideology, political leaders do generally set the precedent for their respective political party. This leads declining accountability for elected leaders and is a harmful precedent for our democracy.

“Race for Congress”

November 3

On Thursday, November 3rd, the Foley Institute hosted Democratic Candidate for Congress Natasha Hill for a question-and-answer candidate forum.

Hill began her talk by discussing her childhood as a fourth generation Washingtonian in the Hilliard area of Spokane in a working-class family. She dealt with racism at an early age within her own family and neighborhood, learning to call out racism in a conversational way that emphasized assertion and education. She was able to work her way through school and get a degree from the University of Washington and dealt with homelessness while going to law school in South California.

When she graduated in the Great Recession, finding a job amid surging unemployment while saddled with debt was yet another reminder to Hill of how our economic systems need to change. Hill stated that the current system of consumer debt, corporate welfare, and failed trickledown economics is actively preventing our country from moving forward. Hill argued strongly in favor of funding community health centers, education, and giving police sufficient resources to respond to drug and mental health crises.

“Election Day Panel”

November 8

On Tuesday November 8th the Foley Institute held a special election panel on the 2022 midterms with Todd Donovan, Western Washington, Travis Ridout, Washington State, and Michael Ritter Washington State.

Donovan noted that ballot measures on direct democracy, abortion, incarceration, marijuana, and ranked choice voting may impact turnout. The victory of a democrat in Alaska’s house special election shows that a ‘red wave’ in the house may be slightly exaggerated. Donovan stated that a wide ray of possibilities is possible, though he expected democrats to take losses in both chambers.

Ridout began by noting that Biden had won in a majority of the House seats up for election in 2020, but that current polling for democrats is far below what they may need to keep control of the chamber. Further compounding this, polls also generally fail to measure Trump’s support base who are often undercounted in polls. Midterms also attract partisan, educated voters who tend to vote the party line. Despite the polls looking ominous for democrats, several high-profile Republican candidates like Herschel Walker and Mehmet Oz have suffered from numerous campaign scandals that may hinder Republican chances in the senate. Ridout also agreed with Donovan that democrats would likely lose the house by a wide margin but expected democrats would keep the senate.

Ritter spoke on how state election laws affect election results. Early voting restrictions can advantage one party over another by allowing certain kinds of voting, with in person early voting favoring republicans and mail voting favoring democrats. State by state voting law discrepancies caused great confusion and mistrust of the 2020 election that may again surface in 2022. Ritter expected republicans to retake the house and noted that the senate would be a coinflip for either party.

“Talk with your WA Ninth District legislators”

December 6

On Tuesday December 6, Washington State legislators Senator Mark Schoesler and Representative Mary Dye gave their annual talk at the Foley Institute addressing their constituents in the 9th district, which includes Pullman.

Senator Mark Schoesler opened up the session by discussing his role as the Ranking Republican on the Capital Budget Committee. He noted that the committee is generally bipartisan, with Senator Mullet from the 5th legislative district amongst his favorite colleagues to work with. Schoesler continued that his role on Labor, Commerce, and Tribal Affairs involves challenging disputes over labor rights, cannabis use, and gambling.

Representative Mary Dye discussed her role on the Appropriations and Environment and Energy Committee. She discussed the recent Cap and Trade policy passed in Washington’s legislature and argued that more of the revenue received by the act should go towards building resiliency as opposed to immediate benefits. Dye emphasized the bipartisanship found in her committee, and said she was looking forward to the upcoming session.