Interview with Wendy Bable

Wendy Bable is a white, cis, neurodivergent woman who is from and currently resides in Pennsylvania. She works in theater, but when COVID-19 pandemic hit, her contracts were cancelled. After making masks for local nurses, she wanted to find ways to serve Native American communities so she joined the Auntie Sewing Squad in late April of 2020.https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/auntiesewing_interviews/1052/thumbnail.jp

How Do Investors React to Corporate Political Spending Disclosure?

My dissertation consists of three main parts. In the first part, I provide a literature review discussing the history of campaign finance law in the United States, the literature examining the determinants of corporate political spending, the literature examining the influence of political concerns on investing decisions, and the literature applicable to the disclosure of corporate political spending. This part is intended to provide the reader with a broad base of information to better understand the context of my experimental study in the second part. In the second part, I present an experimental study examining how investors react to the disclosure of corporate political spending. In the ongoing debate over whether public companies should be required to disclose their political spending, one frequent argument against requiring disclosure is that investors do not consider political spending information relevant for their decisions. However, I predict and find in my experiment that investors whose political identities are aligned with a company’s political spending assess the company as more attractive and invest more in the company than investors whose political identities are misaligned with the political spending. Interestingly, this effect stems from the negative reactions of misaligned investors. The attractiveness assessments and investment amounts of misaligned investors are significantly lower than those of investors in a control condition with no political spending disclosure, but those of aligned investors are not significantly different from those in the control condition. My results also provide evidence that investors use political spending information consciously rather than because of a subconscious bias. These findings have implications for regulators because, contrary to the argument that political spending information is irrelevant to investors, my results suggest that investors consciously use political spending information in their investment decisions. In the third part, I discuss future research possibilities on corporate political spending disclosure. I outline research questions that would extend my experimental study, and I identify research questions related to managerial decision-making about corporate political spending and its disclosure. Finally, I note the importance of also considering the effects of corporate political spending disclosure on other stakeholders such as suppliers and customers

Indigenous Feminist Pedagogy Disorienting Whiteness as Disappearance: Passage of the Violence Against Women Act of 2013

This project brings together rhetorical theory and law to construct a grounded theory named critically sovereign feminist methodology (CSFM). It draws upon rhetorical theory, legal cases, and the rights of Indigenous women (“Native women,” hereafter, reflecting these activists’ self-identification). It examines literacy activities deployed by various Native women activists related to VAWA 2013 and explores why these activities are invaluable pedagogical tools for future activists and social-change strategists. It does so by adapting a critical race theory approach to illuminate the pedagogical frameworks deployed by these Native women activists in their literacy activities to transform the prior limits placed on Tribal Nations’ inherent sovereignty and characterized by tactics of disappearance. Drawing out principles of a critical feminist pedagogy, this project explicates these features through rhetorical analysis of the play, Sliver of a Full Moon and Amnesty International’s report, “Maze of Injustice: The Failure of the United States to Protect Native Women.” This project also provides the deep historical connection of “Indian” rights and legal cases to contemporary social movements of Indigenous women, offering a framework for import by activists in the areas of law and rhetoric

Tribally Defined Citizenship Criteria: Countering Whiteness as Property Interpretations of “Indian” for Restoring Inherent Sovereignty

This article implements the framework of whiteness of property to articulate the ways in which holdings of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) have limited Tribal Nations’ sovereignty because of the illegibility and correlative dispossession of inherent sovereignty itself. This article also highlights how these past SCOTUS opinions, especially recently, threaten to further reduce tribal sovereignty insofar as Tribal Nation citizenship remains based upon blood quantum. The case studies examined herein were selected because of the ways they strategically diminished Tribal Nation sovereignty via rhetorical precarity created using equivocations on the meaning of “Indian.” Through articulating how SCOTUS opinions shifted the meaning of sovereignty from a basis in Tribal Nations’ territory, i.e., property, towards one based on membership, blood quantum as another mechanism for dispossession and disappearance becomes clearer. This article argues that SCOTUS’s blind spots with regard to tribal sovereignty are mechanisms of whiteness as property that make invisible the rights of Tribal Nations so as to dispossess sovereignty as another de-evolutionary tactic of de juro federal common law resulting in de facto property dispossession in the modern era. Through SCOTUS opinions reshaping the meaning of who counts as “Indian,” sovereignty is further threatened because of increased precarity linked to blood quantum as a supposed racist qualifier for citizenship. Most simply, if SCOTUS can enumerate that blood quantum serving as a basis for tribal sovereignty is racist, Tribal Nation sovereignty itself might be delegitimated, and the otherwise persistent debt owed to its citizens as first-in-time, first-in-right owners is erased; the debt owed then can be forgotten. That is, the U.S. fiduciary obligation may also disappear

Tribally Defined Citizenship Criteria: Countering Whiteness as Property Interpretations of “Indian” for Restoring Inherent Sovereignty

This article implements the framework of whiteness of property to articulate the ways in which holdings of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) have limited Tribal Nations’ sovereignty because of the illegibility and correlative dispossession of inherent sovereignty itself. This article also highlights how these past SCOTUS opinions, especially recently, threaten to further reduce tribal sovereignty insofar as Tribal Nation citizenship remains based upon blood quantum. The case studies examined herein were selected because of the ways they strategically diminished Tribal Nation sovereignty via rhetorical precarity created using equivocations on the meaning of “Indian.” Through articulating how SCOTUS opinions shifted the meaning of sovereignty from a basis in Tribal Nations’ territory, i.e., property, towards one based on membership, blood quantum as another mechanism for dispossession and disappearance becomes clearer. This article argues that SCOTUS’s blind spots with regard to tribal sovereignty are mechanisms of whiteness as property that make invisible the rights of Tribal Nations so as to dispossess sovereignty as another de-evolutionary tactic of de juro federal common law resulting in de facto property dispossession in the modern era. Through SCOTUS opinions reshaping the meaning of who counts as “Indian,” sovereignty is further threatened because of increased precarity linked to blood quantum as a supposed racist qualifier for citizenship. Most simply, if SCOTUS can enumerate that blood quantum serving as a basis for tribal sovereignty is racist, Tribal Nation sovereignty itself might be delegitimated, and the otherwise persistent debt owed to its citizens as first-in-time, first-in-right owners is erased; the debt owed then can be forgotten. That is, the U.S. fiduciary obligation may also disappear