Schedule of Events

I theorize that there is a common denominator linking one’s opposition to the legalization of marijuana and abortion: a desire to preserve the social hierarchy dictated by race and gender. Abortion laws are traditionally used to uphold women’s “correct” place in society as mothers and caretakers. Abortion restrictions limit their access to family planning, and negatively impact career options and advancements. Drug laws have been used to incarcerate large numbers of people of color under the guise of “law and order,” while white drug use is largely seen as a health epidemic. I measure adherence to a social hierarchy with people’s preference for traditional gender roles and expressions of racial resentment (a denial of systemic inequality for people of color). I then test to see if holding beliefs that preserve the social hierarchy predicts an opposition to abortion and marijuana legalization policies. Through a statistical analysis of the 2022 General Social Survey dataset, I find preliminary support for my theory helping us to understand the motivations beyond partisanship or ideology for important contemporary issues. Moreover, this topic sheds light on underlying inequalities and injustices faced by certain social groups within policy preference. With a better understanding of this dynamic, policymakers and society can foster social cohesion by implementing changes that will positively impact all of society.

On October 3, 2023, the U.S. House of Representatives voted in the affirmative on H.Res.757, a resolution introduced the day prior by Republican firebrand Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) that would effectively remove Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) from his role as Speaker of the House. In a 216-210 vote, the Office of the Speaker was declared vacant for the first time in American history, bringing the entire legislative branch to a standstill for three weeks while House Republicans deliberated over who they felt best represented modern conservative ideology. H.Res.757 demonstrated a blatant, weaponized misuse of the legislative process and exposed the extent to which polarization has penetrated modern American politics.

This study will examine how extreme polarization among and within American political parties has impacted the productivity and health of the U.S. government. To best understand this relationship, this study will seek to answer the following questions through in-depth interviews conducted with eligible voters, employees of elected officials, and media professionals:



What has been the state of American political polarization since 2009?


How has polarization among and within political parties impacted the health and productivity of the democratic process?


What could be the future repercussions of governance given the state of polarization, using H.Res.757 as the case study?

The act of banning books is on the rise in the United States. The number of books permanently banned from school libraries or temporarily under review from July to December of 2022 is 1,477 books. PEN America indicates this was the highest record of books banned in one school semester than the two previous semesters. Florida and Texas are the leading states to support book bans with the help of state policy. Approximately 30% of books on the subject matter of race, people of color, and racism were not only banned from school libraries but prohibited ethnic studies in the educational curriculum of public schools. This research report will study how the recent increase in book bans in states like Texas and Florida impacts the quality of public school education and the quality of educational curriculum for students in the 6th through 12th grade. The research will examine the implications of book banning and seek to analyze these topics:



What is the history of book bans in the United States and the new wave of censorship?  


How have states like Texas and Florida implemented book bans?


What is the impact on student's learning experiences from 6th to 12th grade due to the book ban and censorship of ethnic studies? 

The decision of Roe v. Wade in 1973 guaranteed women the right to terminate a pregnancy is protected under the 14th Amendments due process clause. Serving as a bedrock for privacy rights, the Roe v. Wade decision allowed access to an abortion guaranteed women individual liberties, away from government intrusion. The 50 year precedent ended on June 24th, 2022 as the Supreme Court issued the decision of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. In its opinion, the court dismantled the right to an abortion under the provisions granted in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Due to the decision, the question of whether a woman may terminate her pregnancy is now a matter left to state governments. The decision has a drastic change on political preferences, patterns and activism habits amongst young females aged 18-24. Young voters are changing the political discourse because their opinions in past and upcoming elections are based on the recent Supreme Court decision and new abortion laws. Abortion and reproductive rights activism is much more prominent throughout cities with young women spearheading the discussion. The purpose of this study is to examine how the Dobbs decision has affected young women voters' political activism and civic engagement. To assess the relationship, the study examined pre recorded data collected before and after the Dobbs decision as well as female individuals aged 18-22 studying at California Lutheran University. In order to achieve well rounded results, qualitative and quantitative data methods were utilized.