Ratification Vote Research Articles

Introducing the International Treaty Ratification Votes Database

AbstractThis research note introduces the International Treaty Ratification Votes Database, which covers more than 6,000 votes on the ratification of international treaties in Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States between 1990 and 2019. In addition, the database presents data on the voting behavior of ninety parties in eight of these countries, resulting in more than 11,000 party observations. The research note presents the two datasets with their two units of analysis, the parliamentary and the party level, and describes the main variables, reaching from descriptive vote and cabinet data to issue areas, comparative party family classifications, and actual voting records. Furthermore, we suggest avenues for using the data for future research on the domestic politics of foreign policy: Our data can be used to study patterns in the politicization of international treaties and organizations, ratification delays, legislative–executive relations, the party politics of foreign policy making, and the crisis of the liberal international order.

Solidarity with atypical workers? Survey evidence from the General Motors versus United Auto Workers strike in 2019

AbstractIn this article, we examine the extent to which typical workers act in solidarity with atypical workers. We collected unique survey data from United Auto Workers striking against General Motors in 2019 during the strike and after the ratification vote. Although solidarity was generally high, we do find that typical workers with longer tenure exhibit less solidarity with atypical workers and that they are more prone to be on strike due to material reasons. In the second survey, after workers had voted on the proposed contract, we find that typical workers were more prone to vote yes to the agreement for self‐interested, material reasons and that solidarity with atypical workers had a significant, negative effect on the probability of voting yes to the agreement. Our findings support notions that insiders strike and vote according to self‐interests. We discuss these findings in light of the insider/outsider, dualization and union strategy literature.

Do Shareholder Ratification Votes Impact Subsequent Audit Outcomes?

SUMMARY The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) have justified audit-related disclosure rules by asserting that such information would be relevant for shareholders in auditor ratification voting decisions. The underlying assumption, stated more explicitly by activists and others, is that such voting can influence auditors’ subsequent actions. A recent study by Tanyi, Rama, Raghunandan, and Martin (2020) tests this assumption. Using data from 10,326 auditor ratification votes, Tanyi et al. (2020) find that higher than expected shareholder dissatisfaction of their external auditors is associated with higher audit quality and higher audit fees in the subsequent period. The results suggest that auditors should pro actively engage with audit committees if there is higher than expected shareholder dissatisfaction. Auditors can also expect regulators to use such evidence in future rule proposals by the SEC and PCAOB, given past actions by regulators.

2022 taxonomic update of phylum Negarnaviricota (Riboviria: Orthornavirae), including the large orders Bunyavirales and Mononegavirales.

In March 2022, following the annual International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) ratification vote on newly proposed taxa, the phylum Negarnaviricota was amended and emended. The phylum was expanded by two new families (bunyaviral Discoviridae and Tulasviridae), 41 new genera, and 98 new species. Three hundred forty-nine species were renamed and/or moved. The accidentally misspelled names of seven species were corrected. This article presents the updated taxonomy of Negarnaviricota as now accepted by the ICTV.

State News

A 10‐week strike by about 2,000 therapists and other mental health professionals in Northern California ended with a ratification vote announced Oct. 21, CNN Business reported. The strike, by Kaiser Permanente workers, was one of a growing number of work stoppages nationwide that have been focused on issues other than wages and benefits. The wage increases included in the four‐year Kaiser Permanente deal were relatively modest: a 4% retroactive pay increase for the past year and a 3% raise for each of the next three years. But the workers' union said it won its main bargaining goals of better working conditions that will improve patient care and stop the rapid turnover of staff. Among the changes is an increase from 60 to 90 minutes of time that therapists will have to conduct an initial assessment of children. Kaiser Permanente also committed to increase staffing, according to the union. “Our strike was difficult and draining, but it was worth it,” said Natalie Rogers, a therapist for Kaiser in Santa Rosa, California. “We stood up to the biggest nonprofit [health maintenance organization] HMO in the nation, and we made gains that will help us better serve our patients and will advance the cause of mental health parity throughout the country.”

Article V and the Law of Constitutional Conventions

Abstract Can an Article V convention be limited? While there is an emerging consensus that it can, in this paper I focus on John A. Jameson's legal treatise on constitutional conventions and the jurisprudence it spawned to help round out our understanding of both Article V in particular, and of constitutional revision more generally. Jameson's treatise was directed to the larger question of whether constitutional conventions in general could be limited. Since its initial publication in 1867, courts have relied upon Jameson's insights to build a law of constitutional conventions at the state level. Several components of this jurisprudence are particularly relevant to Article V, including the distinction between constitutional and revolutionary conventions, the distinction between amendment and revision, and the requirements of convention acts and ratification votes, in addition to the preclusion of a robust role for the electorate in the Article V convention process. This jurisprudence is readily available for courts to help guide them in determining the nature and limits of an Article V convention.

Differentiating between viruses and virus species by writing their names correctly.

Following the results of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) Ratification Vote held in March 2021, a standard two-part "binomial nomenclature" is now the norm for naming virus species. Adoption of the new nomenclature is still in its infancy; thus, it is timely to reiterate the distinction between "virus" and "virus species" and to provide guidelines for naming and writing them correctly.

The Impact of Mandatory Auditor Tenure Disclosures on Ratification Voting, Auditor Dismissal, and Audit Pricing*

ABSTRACTRecent amendments to Auditing Standard (AS) 3101 require disclosure of the initial year of the auditor‐client relationship in the audit report. As the standard was being discussed, auditors, clients, and some PCAOB members expressed reservations about the necessity of tenure disclosures and were particularly concerned about disclosing tenure in the audit report. Our purpose is to investigate whether the tenure disclosures mandated by AS 3101 are associated with changes in stakeholder behavior. We predict and find that after the implementation date, ratification votes against the auditor and the probability of subsequent auditor dismissal increase for long‐tenured versus short‐tenured auditors. Results from a path analysis further suggest that the relative increase in dismissal for long‐tenured auditors appears to be influenced directly through tenure disclosures and indirectly through ratification voting. We also predict and find that negotiating power decreases for long‐tenured auditors as evidenced by lower audit fees. Our results are comparable for companies that voluntarily disclosed and companies that did not disclose auditor tenure in their proxy statements prior to the AS 3101 amendment. Overall, our study suggests that mandatory disclosure of auditor tenure in the audit report significantly affects stakeholder behavior. The PCAOB should consider our findings carefully as they evaluate whether AS 3101 is achieving its intended purpose.

Taxonomy update for the family Alphasatellitidae: new subfamily, genera, and species.

Alphasatellites (family Alphasatellitidae) are circular, single-stranded DNA molecules (~1-1.4 kb) that encode a replication-associated protein and have commonly been associated with some members of the families Geminiviridae, Nanoviridae, and Metaxyviridae (recently established). Here, we provide a taxonomy update for the family Alphasatellitidae following the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) Ratification Vote held in March 2021. The taxonomic update includes the establishment of the new subfamily Petromoalphasatellitinae. This new subfamily includes three new genera as well as the genus Babusatellite, which previously belonged to the subfamily Nanoalphasatellitinae. Additionally, three new genera and 14 new species have been established in the subfamily Geminialphasatellitinae, as well as five new species in the subfamily Nanoalphasatellitinae.

2021 Taxonomic update of phylum Negarnaviricota (Riboviria: Orthornavirae), including the large orders Bunyavirales and Mononegavirales.

In March 2021, following the annual International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) ratification vote on newly proposed taxa, the phylum Negarnaviricota was amended and emended. The phylum was expanded by four families (Aliusviridae, Crepuscuviridae, Myriaviridae, and Natareviridae), three subfamilies (Alpharhabdovirinae, Betarhabdovirinae, and Gammarhabdovirinae), 42 genera, and 200 species. Thirty-nine species were renamed and/or moved and seven species were abolished. This article presents the updated taxonomy of Negarnaviricota as now accepted by the ICTV.

The Impact of Mandatory Auditor Tenure Disclosures on Ratification Voting, Auditor Dismissal, and Audit Pricing

Recent amendments to Auditing Standard (AS) 3101 require disclosure of the initial year of the auditor-client relationship in the audit report. As the standard was being discussed, auditors, clients, and some PCAOB members expressed reservations about the necessity of tenure disclosures and were particularly concerned about disclosing tenure in the audit report. Our purpose is to investigate whether the tenure disclosures mandated by AS 3101 are associated with changes in stakeholder behavior. We predict and find that after the implementation date, ratification votes against the auditor and the probability of subsequent auditor dismissal increase for long-tenured versus short-tenured auditors. Results from a path analysis further suggest that the relative increase in dismissal for long-tenured auditors appears to be influenced directly through tenure disclosures and indirectly through ratification voting. We also predict and find that negotiating power decreases for long-tenured auditors as evidenced by lower audit fees. Our results are comparable for companies that voluntarily disclosed and companies that did not disclose auditor tenure in their proxy statements prior to the AS 3101 amendment. Overall, our study suggests that mandatory disclosure of auditor tenure in the audit report significantly affects stakeholder behavior. The PCAOB should consider our findings carefully as they evaluate whether AS 3101 is achieving its intended purpose.

The Woman’s Hour: Our Fight for the Right to Vote (Adapted for Young Readers) by Elaine Weiss

Reviewed by: The Woman’s Hour: Our Fight for the Right to Vote (Adapted for Young Readers) by Elaine Weiss Elizabeth Bush Weiss, Elaine The Woman’s Hour: Our Fight for the Right to Vote (Adapted for Young Readers). Random House, 2020 [224p] illus. with photographs Library ed. ISBN 9780593125199 $20.99 Trade ed. ISBN 9780593125182 $17.99 E-book ed. ISBN 9780593125205 $10.99 Reviewed from galleys R* Gr. 6-10 “They were drenched by rainstorms, chased by watchdogs, and stranded by flat tires. But they found their men.” “They” were the pro- and anti-suffrage activists who blew through Tennessee in the summer of 1920, and “their men” were the Tennessee legislators who would be called into special session for a ratification vote that would seal the fate of the Nineteenth Amendment that would give women the [End Page 452] right to vote. Whereas many books for youth in this centennial year offer overviews of first wave feminism, this rousing adaptation of Weiss’ adult work zooms in on the nailbiting eleventh-hour blitz to push Tennessee off the fence—either expanding on the partial suffrage legislation it had just passed a year prior, or retracting from further enfranchisement under the banner of states’ rights, traditionalist values, and racism. “Suffs” Carrie Chapman Catt of the National American Woman Suffrage Association (who grabbed the baton from Susan B. Anthony) and Sue White of the National Woman’s Party (under the leadership of firebrand Alice Paul) go head to head with “Anti” Josephine Pearson of the Tennessee State Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage (a politically active organization dedicated to keeping women out of politics). It’s a drama rife with dirty tricks, double-dealing, business lobbying, election year horse-trading, surprising alliances, and last-minute defections, all unfolding with the flow of a gripping novel. Weiss eschews the tone of Noble Purpose Triumphant for a clear-eyed assessment of driven women with ethically questionable gambits and serious philosophical blind spots whose final nasty battle nonetheless pushed our nation forward. Illustrated plates and a selected bibliography are included; the bound book will include an index. Copyright © 2020 The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

Why do firms seek shareholders ratification of the independent audit function? The case of foreign cross‐listed companies in the United States

Many factors influence why companies require routine auditor ratifications. In this study, we seek to examine factors that increase or decrease the likelihood of shareholders’ involvement in the ratification of the independent auditor's appointment for foreign cross‐listed companies in the United States. Foreign cross‐listed companies provide a unique opportunity to observe how country‐specific factors impact the auditor ratification vote decision and outcome. Our analysis shows that bank financing, the location of the cross‐listed firm's independent auditor (U.S.‐based vs. non‐U.S.‐based audit office), and non‐audit fee ratio as having the highest marginal effects on the probability of companies requiring their shareholders to ratify the auditor's appointment. We also examine how these factors influence the outcome of the vote. We find that several engagement and country‐specific factors also influence the outcome of the vote.

Taxonomy of the order Mononegavirales: update 2019.

In February 2019, following the annual taxon ratification vote, the order Mononegavirales was amended by the addition of four new subfamilies and 12 new genera and the creation of 28 novel species. This article presents the updated taxonomy of the order Mononegavirales as now accepted by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV).

Taxonomy of the order Bunyavirales: update 2019.

In February 2019, following the annual taxon ratification vote, the order Bunyavirales was amended by creation of two new families, four new subfamilies, 11 new genera and 77 new species, merging of two species, and deletion of one species. This article presents the updated taxonomy of the order Bunyavirales now accepted by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV).

Buried Alive: The Reboot of the Equal Rights Amendment

This Article addresses the recent effort to revive the proposed Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the Constitution. Following ratifications by Nevada (2017) and Illinois (2), the ERA stands close to the three-fourths vote in the states required for ratification under Article Five. But these recent ratifications are of uncertain validity, as Congress imposed a deadline for the ERA's ratification that expired in 1982. The paper argues that Congress can waive the expired ratification deadline but should not do so until there is no doubt that 38 states have voted for ratification. There is room for doubt on that score because five states rescinded their ratification votes in the 1970s. Congress is free to disregard these rescissions on the ground that a state may not repeal its ratification of a proposed constitutional amendment. Ignoring these state rescissions in addition to waiving the ratification deadline, though, would raise substantial concerns about the ERA’s legitimacy and may lead a future Congress to attempt the reversal of that recognition. Thus, the wise course is for Congress to refrain from taking action on the ERA until 38 states can be counted as yes votes without the five rescinding states. If Congress decides to include these five states as part of the ratification total, then at least two-thirds of the Senate and the House of Representatives should be required to support that decision — in accord with a precedent established by the Fourteenth Amendment--to quiet the doubts about the validity of the ERA’s ratification.

Should Uninformed Shareholders Vote? Evidence from Auditor Ratification

We investigate the influence and implications of retail shareholder participation in the proxy voting process. Using the shareholder vote on auditor ratification – a setting which facilitates the identification of an informed vote – we find that, on average, shareholder votes against auditor ratification are not associated with audit failures but are strongly associated with investment performance. We next consider how these relations vary with the composition of a company’s voting base and find evidence that the auditor ratification vote is less informed (i.e., associated with factors that do not reflect auditor performance) when retail ownership is higher. In subsequent tests, we find that the probability of auditor dismissal is increasing in the proportion of votes against auditor ratification, regardless of the level of retail ownership. Collectively, our results suggest that some auditors are dismissed for factors not directly related to auditor performance. More generally, our results suggest that votes cast by retail shareholders can limit the efficacy of proxy voting as a corporate governance tool.

Loyal Denominatorism and the Fourteenth Amendment: Normative Defense and Implications

This Article and a companion defend a revisionist explanation for the Fourteenth Amendment’s legitimacy. The legitimacy of both the Amendment’s proposal and ratification are imperiled by the exclusion of Southern states from Congress between 1865 and 1868: the exclusion was essential for the Amendment’s two-thirds supermajorities in the House and Senate, and the demand that the South ratify before being represented was essential for the Amendment’s three-fourths supermajority among the states. Congress justified the exclusion of Southern representatives by the suspension of Southern states’ “political relations in the Union” during the war; such suspensions continued until Congress restored them. As the companion paper makes clear, a great many Republicans and other observers applied the same theory to Article V. The right to say no to an amendment—that is, the right to be included in the denominator from which a three-fourths ratification vote was calculated—was restored at the same time as other “political relations in the Union.” On this theory, the Fourteenth Amendment became law on February 12, 1867, when Pennsylvania ratified, bringing ratifications to twenty of the twenty-six represented in Congress.While its companion explains at great length the historical prevalence of Article V loyal denominatorism during Reconstruction, this Article defends the loyal Article V denominator on the merits and explains several important implications.The loyal-denominator intellectual cocktail has four parts: one part linguistics, two parts law of war, and one part separation of war power, each ingredient subject to surprisingly little real controversy. (a) The linguistic ingredient is tacit quantifier domain restriction. Language users always presuppose some domain of application for their words, almost always both non-universal and tacit. The presupposition that states with power in the Union are not engaged in war against the Union is quite similar in kind to the sorts of presupposition discussed by all careful thinkers about language (ancient, contemporaneous with the Founding, modern, or anywhere in between). (b) The first law-of-war ingredient applies this linguistic theory to war. Agreements that make a “tacit supposition of peace,” as Vattel put it, are suspended during a war between the contracting parties or constituent parts. (c) The second law-of-war ingredient concerns the end of war, or jus post bellum: victorious parties in armed conflict may demand not only formal external surrender, but reliable submission, from their opponents. (d) Finally, Congress’s power to “declare War,” i.e., the power to declare that a state of war exists, obviously includes the power to delay the establishment of a condition of peace by declaring that a state of war still exists. The Tennessee Readmission Act of 1866 and Reconstruction Act of 1867 made very clear that Congress did not yet regard the South to be in a state of peace. Congress was not required to spell out the application to Article V.The adoption of this view is important for several reasons. (a) First, in line with the first Federalist Paper’s vision of our constitutional-adoption process, it allows us to see the Fourteenth Amendment as the genuine result of federally-structured “reflection and choice” at the time of Reconstruction rather than “accident and force.” If we limit the Article V “We the People” to loyal states, we need neither nationalize it, like Ackerman, nor make it intergenerational, like Colby, nor allow it to be subject to coercion, like Harrison and Amar. (b) Second, recognizing the centrality of jus post bellum issues to the legitimacy of the Amendment at the time of its very adoption can help us better understand the failure to follow through on enforcement of the Amendment in the South. The Fourteenth Amendment was and is the object of the South’s submission, not a joint expression of the unimpaired “equal sovereignty” of all states. (c) Third, we see the importance of context to the inference of tacit restrictions for interpretation, something originalists and textualists have recently been accused of neglecting. (d) Fourth, to the extent that, like McDonald v. Chicago, we think rights prevalent at the time of adoption are critical, the North in 1867, not the nation in 1868, should control us, and the regional skew to state-constitutional gun rights during Reconstruction undermines McDonald’s claim to consensus.

Market Reaction to Auditor Ratification Vote Tally

SYNOPSIS This paper provides empirical evidence that the proportion of shareholder votes against the ratification of the auditor is informative to investors' perception of the auditor-client relationship. We find that lower shareholder approval of the auditor is associated with a negative market reaction to the 8-K announcement of the auditor ratification vote. Additionally, we find that the market reaction is more negative when a high level of auditor dissatisfaction is likely a surprise to investors, such as when audit and auditor characteristics suggest that the auditor provides high audit quality. We provide confirming evidence that withheld votes are associated with a higher likelihood of a future auditor dismissal and that the market reaction to the dismissal is more positive for firms with lower shareholder approval of the auditor. JEL Classifications: G34; G30; M40.

Auditor Ratification: Can't Get No (Dis)Satisfaction

SYNOPSIS The auditor ratification vote provides shareholders with an opportunity to voice their opinions about the company's choice of auditor, but, historically, less than 2 percent of shareholders express dissent in their vote. Motivated by regulatory attention on the importance of shareholder involvement and the institutional power of proxy advisors on voting outcomes, I examine the proxy advisor's role in the auditor ratification vote. I find that proxy advisors have a statistically significant influence over shareholder voting outcomes when they recommend against auditor ratification, but the Against recommendation is rare, and the qualitative significance is less clear. Proxy advisor Against recommendations are based on concerns about auditor independence and poor audit quality, but there appears to be variation in the extent to which proxy advisors issue Against recommendations for each of these criteria. I discuss the implications of the findings, which should be of interest to regulators, investors, public companies, and audit firms.