How far does the gender gap extend?: Decision making on state Supreme Courts in Fourth Amendment Cases, 1980–2000

The importance of women on the bench and the influence of gender on judicial decision making has garnered much scholarly attention. We examine the voting behavior of male and female justices in 718 Fourth Amendment search and seizure votes cast on state Supreme Courts between 1980 and 2000. We find that women justices, controlling for institutional, political, and legal constraints, are more likely to rule in favor of the criminal defendant than their male brethren in cases decided after 1991 but not before. We also find women justices serving with female colleagues are more inclined to render liberal votes. We conclude the influence of gender may be evident in a wider variety of cases than those dealing with women's lives but that this influence is dependent upon the existence of a critical mass of women on the state court benches.     

Constrained allocation problems with single-peaked preferences: An axiomatic analysis

We introduce a new class of problems that contains two existing classes: allocation problems with single-peaked preferences and bankruptcy problems. On this class, we analyze the implications of well-known properties such as Pareto optimality, strategy-proofness, resource-monotonicity, no-envy, equal treatment of equals, and two new properties we introduce, hierarchical no-envy and independence of nonbinding constraints. Unlike earlier literature, we consider rules that allow free-disposability. We present characterizations of a rule we introduce on this domain. We relate this rule to well-known rules on the aforementioned subdomains. Based on this relation, we present a characterization of a well-known bankruptcy rule called the constrained equal awards rule. Received: 22 June 2000/Accepted: 21 March 2002 This paper is based on the first chapter of my Ph.D. thesis submitted to the University of Rochester. I wish to thank my advisor, William Thomson, for helpful comments and suggestions.     

International Tax Competition: A Case for International Cooperation in Globalization

The liberalization of international financial flows and foreign direct investment has induced countries to use diverse measures to attract inflow of foreign capital and foreign direct investment, which is expected to have a positive effect on the growth of GDP and thus a positive effect on social welfare. Tax exemption, reduction of tax rate, tax holiday, or diverse subsidies are some of the most important measures used. In this paper we study international tax cooperation, i.e., countries change and especially reduce tax rate for corporate income or for asset revenues to attract inflow of foreign direct investment. Both theoretical and empirical studies have shown the sensibility of foreign direct investment decision with respect to tax rate differences between home countries and host countries. In general, more inflow of foreign direct investment can be expected if the tax rate of the home country is lower than that of foreign countries. This is the main reason for international tax cooperation. In this paper we propose a simple model to prove the sub-optimal Nash non cooperative solution in a two-country tax-competition game. The model shows that international tax cooperation can improve welfare of the participating countries. How to reach a cooperative solution for an international tax competition game (ITCG) is therefore an important issue for further discussions and studies. International institutions can play a crucial role to reach international tax cooperation or international tax harmonization.     

Innovation,accountability, and independence at three private foundations funding higher education civic engagement, 1995 to 2005

This case study looks at changes in private foundation funding for higher education civic engagement from 1995 to 2005. The focus is three large, established foundations that were U.S. national leaders in supporting this activity during these years: Carnegie, Pew, and Kellogg. Data sources include (1) in‐depth conversations with four strategically placed foundation insiders and six nationally recognized campus leaders and (2) scans of Web sites of the three foundations that document the change in funding priorities over time, plus Web sites of the main campus initiatives supported and national campus civic engagement organizations such as Campus Compact. Research findings con‐ firm and specify other studies that suggest that foundations shift their funding priorities according to their perceived role as innovators, pressures to be accountable and show clear results, and their independence as private organizations. The article concludes by raising questions about private foundations generally in relation to issues of innovativeness, accountability, and independence.