Race, Gender, Sexuality, Ability, Identity and Cycling, Blog 8

Student blog posts from the Great VCU Bike Race Book

A Vote Cast; A Vote Counted: Quantifying Voting Rights through Proportional Representation in Congressional Elections

The current winner-take-all or first-past-the-post system of voting promotes an inefficient market where votes are often wasted. In this system, representatives are selected from a single district in which the candidate with the plurality of votes gains victory. Candidates who appear non-generic can rarely, if ever, expect to receive the most votes in this system. This phenomenon is especially apparent when African-Americans and other minority groups seek elected office. In part because white voters constitute at least a plurality of voters in every state except Hawaii, minorities in the forty-nine other states have had historically little success in gaining election to the United States Senate. As a consequence, the only real opportunity for minorities to gain access to federal elected office remains limited to the United States House of Representatives. The flaws of the winner-take-all-system and single member district are readily apparent. First, significant blocs of voters are consistently denied the right to elect a truly preferred candidate, because such candidates can almost never expect to receive the most votes. Consequently, many potential candidates are deterred from running because the prospect for victory is so slim. As a result, large numbers of voters are often forced to select the candidate they believe has the greatest chance of winning, rather than their preferred candidate. In addition, many voters in a winner-take-all system are represented by persons they did not support. For instance, in 1994, while Democratic candidates for Iowa\u27s five seats in the United States House of Representatives received 42% of the total votes cast in Iowa, none of Iowa\u27s five congressional seats was won by a Democrat. Similarly, in 1992, Republican congressional candidates garnered 48% of the two-party statewide vote in North Carolina, but won only four of twelve seats. Thus, many losing votes may be considered wasted. Wasted votes may also include those cast for the victorious candidate: any vote cast in addition to the number needed for victory might as well have never been cast. Thus, in landslide races, where the prospect of wasting one\u27s vote is high, the incentive to vote seems almost non-existent. Since over 75 percent of congressional races in any given election tend to be landslide races, many eligible voters do not vote. This Article considers an alternative system of voting: proportional representation, of which there are two basic forms, List System and Choice Voting/Single Transferable Vote. In the list system, a voter simply selects one party and its slate of candidates. Thereafter, the seats are allocated on the basis of the share of votes each party earned. For instance, in the Iowa congressional example discussed above, instead of receiving zero congressional seats with 42% of the statewide vote, the state Democratic Party would have earned two seats out of the available five. Often, with the list system, a minimum share of votes (such as 5%) is required for a party to earn representation. Alternatively, in a choice voting system, a voter simply ranks candidates in order of preference (first choice, second choice, etc.). Once a voter\u27s first choice is elected or eliminated, the voter\u27s excess votes are transferred to subsequent preferred candidates until all the seats are filled. In either arrangement, proportional representation would diminish wasted votes, provide greater opportunities for minority groups to gain access to legislative positions, and offer greater incentive for eligible voters to vote. Though proportional representation risks the election of fringe groups (such as hate groups), a minimum bar of 5% to 7% would likely neutralize that possibility. All told, proportional representation appears to be an intriguing alternative to our present winner-take-all voting system

Do you Believe He Can Fly? Royce White and Reasonable Accommodations Under the Americans with Disabilities Act for NBA Players with Anxiety Disorder and Fear of Flying

This Article examines the legal ramifications of Royce White, a basketball player with general anxiety disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder, playing in the NBA. White\u27s conditions cause him to have a fear of flying, thus making it difficult to play in the NBA. This subject is without precedent in sports law and, because of the unique aspects of an NBA playing career, lacks clear analogy to other employment circumstances. This dispute also illuminates broader legal and policy issues in the relationship between employment and mental illness.This Article argues that White would likely fail in a lawsuit against an NBA team and the NBA under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Case law disfavors recognition of his conditions as workplace disabilities, and even if a court recognizes them as such, there appears to be no reasonable accommodation that doesn\u27t necessitate him flying. This Article also contends that if White cannot adequately resolve his health issues, it would be advisable for him -- and the NBA and Players\u27 Association -- to find creative resolutions. Such an approach would be far preferable to litigation. One such approach could be loaning White\u27s employment to another pro basketball league where all or almost all games are played within driving distance. In that circumstance, he could develop his game against talented pro basketball players and, hopefully, gradually overcome his health issues. The Israel Super Basketball League (Ligat Winner Sal) is one such league. During time in another league, White\u27s NBA employment rights could remain with an NBA team. This Article also insists the NBA and Players\u27 Association take mental health policies more seriously, especially as increasing rates of Americans are diagnosed with mental illness. For years, the NBA and Players\u27 Association have focused on physical health policies while largely ignoring mental health

New concepts in wildlife management

The author’s keynote address touches on a number of issues and trends that affect the field of wildlife management, including a growing anti-hunting sentiment in the U.S., the public’s changing attitudes toward hunting and trapping, and the role of predator control in wildlife management

Phototransistor

A phototransistor is described in which there is included as a part of its integral structure an auxiliary diode in the form of an added base-collector junction. This junction is formed in the surface of the base element and thus out of the direct path between the emitter and collector regions of the phototransistor

Raising Beef Calves

PDF pages:

Motives for Acquisitions in the UK

This paper investigates the motives for acquisitions in the UK. Standard event study methodology is inadequate to distinguish between different motives for acquisitions in any sample. Berkovitch and Narayanan (1993) propose a different methodology to distinguish between competing motives in any sample. This methodology analyses the relationship between the target gain and total gain to distinguish acquisitions driven by efficiency from those driven by agency motives. To differentiate managerial hubris from agency problems, the relationship between target gain and bidder gain is also analysed. The results show that efficiency is the primary motive for acquisitions exhibiting positive total gains. However, there is evidence of managerial hubris in the sample. In acquisitions were total gains are negative, agency problems are the primary motive.Acquisitions, event studies, efficiency, agency problems, managerial hubris.

Tasmanian state election 2014: an overview

This paper provides an overview of Tasmania’s parliamentary and electoral system, the state’s political landscape in the lead up to the election, issues that dominated the 2014 election, the parties, the candidates and the results. Executive summary Tasmanians went to the polls in a state election held on Saturday 15 March 2014 to elect representatives to the 25-seat House of Assembly. Under Tasmania’s Hare-Clark electoral system, voters elect five members to each of Tasmania’s five electorates for a term of up to four years. The Liberal Party of Australia won a decisive majority, claiming 15 of the 25 seats in the House of Assembly including an unprecedented four seats in the electorate of Braddon. The Australian Labor Party was defeated after 16 years in power, claiming seven seats which was down from 10 in 2010. This election also marked the end of the Tasmanian Greens’ power-sharing role since the 2010 state election that had seen the first Greens Cabinet ministers in Australia’s history as part of a Labor-Greens alliance. The party won three seats (down from five in 2010) resulting in the loss of their parliamentary party status. The election saw the emergence of new parties including the Tasmanian Nationals, reformed after 15 years out of the state political arena and the Palmer United Party, although neither of the minor parties won a seat. The following paper provides an overview of Tasmania’s parliamentary and electoral system, the state’s political landscape in the lead up to the election, issues that dominated the election, the parties, the candidates and the results. It discusses trends in pre-election polls as well as the impact of Commonwealth issues and the 2013 Commonwealth election on the results. It draws on media articles, reports of the Tasmanian Electoral Commission and published papers including the Parliamentary Library’s publication on the 2010 Tasmanian election