EXPERTS ADVISORY

University of Michigan experts are available to discuss wide variety of election-related issues.

Election results, public opinion and polling data

Josh Pasek, assistant professor of communication studies, explores how new media and psychological processes shape public opinion and political attitudes and behaviors. He studies whether the use of online social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter might be changing the political information environment. He can discuss the demographics of the election results and how they should be interpreted.

Contact: 484-557-4594 (cell), 734-764-6717, [email protected]

Michael Traugott, professor emeritus of communication studies and political science and a senior research scientist at the U-M Center for Political Studies, is an authority on political communication, public opinion and media polling. “The election results reveal a deep cleavage in American society between those who feel they have been left behind or ignored and those who have an idea of a multicultural society that requires changes that the first group finds uncomfortable,” he said. “This is a polling error on the order of 1948, and it will require considerable effort to figure out what went wrong. All of the modelers and data aggregators also suffered because their basic ingredient are the poll results—nationally and at the state level.”

Contact: 734-763-4702, [email protected]

Nicholas Valentino, associate professor of communication studies and political science, can discuss racial politics in the US. Earlier this year, he published “Why the Sky Didn’t Fall: Mobilizing Anger in Reaction to Voter ID Laws,” which focused on how voting restrictions have angered and mobilized Democrats. He can also discuss sexism in politics.

Contact: 734-647-4302, [email protected]

Arthur Lupia, the Hal R. Varian Collegiate Professor of Political Science and research professor at the Center for Political Studies, examines how people make decisions when they lack information and in how they manage complex information flows.

Contact: 734-647-7549, [email protected]

Vincent Hutchings, professor of political science, is an expert on public opinion, elections, voting behavior and African-American politics.

Contact: 734-764-6591, [email protected]

Aaron Kall, director of the U-M Debate Program and Debate Institute, can discuss the election and the impact of Trump’s communication style on public opinion.

Contact: 734-239-3996, [email protected]

Mara Ostfeld, postdoctoral fellow at the Ford School of Public Policy and assistant professor of political science, is an expert on Latino political attitudes, as well as the broader relationship between race, identity and public opinion. She also works at Telemundo and NBC as an elections analyst.

Contact: 734-615-8684, [email protected]

Economy

Linda Lim, a professor of strategy at the Ross School of Business, is an expert on international trade and investment environment, and the influence of domestic politics, economic policy and culture on business structure, strategy and operations.

“Trump’s campaign focused heavily on trade, especially NAFTA and other trade agreements, the U.S. trade deficit and offshoring of manufacturing jobs. He has specifically said that he would impose a large—35 percent—tariff on imports from Mexico and China. He does have the authority to do so unilaterally, and to terminate trade agreements after consulting with Congress,” she said. “If he does do so, the consequences for the U.S. and world economies would be pretty dire. American consumers and businesses that depend on imported goods and inputs from Mexico and China would immediately be faced with higher costs and prices, and global supply chains would be disrupted, including for the auto industry. A trade war would likely result, with the impacted countries imposing retaliatory measures, hurting U.S. exports. There would be revenue losses and eventually business shutdowns and worker layoffs.

“U.S. economic growth and employment creation would be nipped in the bud and a recession would likely result. Since the U.S. is currently the strongest-growing large economy, the world economy as a whole would also slow and slip into recession, exacerbating the decline. Given these dire consequences, it is possible that Trump would not carry out his promises to restrict trade. Still, the mere threat of such protectionism would be sufficient to discourage some business investment and thus slow growth and employment creation.

Contact: 734-763-0290, [email protected]

Donald Grimes, economist at the Institute for Research on Labor, Employment and the Economy, specializes in economic forecasting and regional economic development. He conducts annual Michigan state and county economic forecasts, and has studied occupational wages in the Great Lakes states and the relationship between education and high-paying jobs. Grimes has also written an essay in The Conversation entitled “What Donald Trump’s surprise victory means for the economy and business.”

Contact: [email protected]

Supreme Court

Richard Hall, professor of political science and public policy, can discuss the U.S. Senate nomination process to replace the late Antonin Scalia.

Contact: 734-730-5405 (cell), 734-763-4390, [email protected]

Richard Primus, the Theodore J. St. Antoine Collegiate Professor of Law, teaches the law, theory and history of the U.S. Constitution.

Contact: 734-647-5543, [email protected]

Foreign Affairs

Melvyn Levitsky is a professor of international policy and practice at the Ford School of Public Policy. He spent 35 years as a U.S. diplomat under eight different presidential administrations. He served as officer-in-charge of U.S.-Soviet bilateral relations and as a political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. He discussed future Russia-US relations in light of Trump’s election as future president.

“Given what candidate Trump has said, the Russians might expect a grace period during which the new Trump Administration would not actively engage with them on Ukraine, Syria, cyber security, nuclear weapons and a host of other issues. However, Putin has made it clear that he believes Russia has done nothing wrong and that the current state of US-Russian relations is due to US actions.

“Unless the Russians are willing to engage, have a candid exchange and negotiate with the new Administration, President Trump will face a challenge that he will not be able to ignore. Despite his nice words about Putin and vice-versa, I do not think he would give, or be able to give the playing field over to the Russians. If he did, he would face a real revolt in Congress, pressure from our allies and from an influential segment of the public.”

Contact: 734-615-4262, [email protected]

Juan Cole, professor of history, is an expert on the Middle East.

“One difficulty in answering this question lies in the quixotic character of Trump himself. He has often taken both sides of a controversial question. For instance, he criticized his predecessors for becoming too entangled in the Middle East, then at one point last March suggested sending in a division (20,000-30,000) of US troops to fight ISIL. As it happens, ISIL as a territorial state could already have been defeated by the time he takes office. Another question is whether, given his erratic statements and behavior, Trump’s cabinet and the permanent Washington bureaucracy (the “deep state”) will actually let him change the direction of US foreign policy radically.

Full comment: How Will Trump Reshape the Middle East?

Contact: 734-764-6305, [email protected]

Silvia Pedraza, professor of sociology and American culture, has interests in the sociology of immigration, and race and ethnicity in America, Cuba and Western Europe. She can discuss US foreign policy as it relates to Latin America and immigration.

Contact: 734-647-3659, [email protected]

“After Trump’s victory, Raúl Castro announced a new round of military exercises. His reaction is, without doubt, exaggerated. Trump has enough problems here, since many Americans don’t want to accept him as president. He’s not going to invade Cuba.

“It’s more likely that Putin does something against Raúl, since he’s been furious since Cuba, for which the Soviet Union did so much, turned towards the U.S. Cuban leaders – Fidel and Raúl – have always used the possibility of an American invasion (which did happen in the Bay of Pigs in 1961 but never happened again, especially given the nonintervention pact after the Missile Crisis) as something to blame for all the economic and political problems of Cuba. As Cuba is now, once again, in a period of enormous economic crisis (given the decline of Venezuela, its benefactor), the assault against Trump / US is a very convenient once again.

“Should Latin America be worried about Trump? Mexico and Central America should be worried, since Trump’s intention is to deport millions of undocumented. I doubt other countries should be concerned.”

Mary Gallagher, professor of political science and director of the Lieberthal-Rogel Center for Chinese Studies, is an expert on Chinese politics, law and society.

“It was likely that either presidential candidate would have adopted a more confrontational policy toward China,” she said. “Given that the ‘Asia Pivot’ policy was adopted under Secretary of State Clinton, a Clinton presidency would have taken a harder line on issues such as the South China Sea and human rights. However, President-elect Trump’s proposed China policies are even more likely to increase dramatically tensions between Washington and Beijing. Perhaps this is what the American electorate wants: policies of economic nationalism, isolationism and anti-globalization. But they will have disastrous effects on our own economy.

“My overriding concern about a Trump presidency is that the United States will also pull back from areas that have seen real U.S.-China cooperation on issues of global concern, such as climate change, piracy and global public health. In other words, either Presidential candidate would have adopted policies that would have tested our bilateral ties. Trump’s presidency will have global implications on issues that reach far beyond the two nations.”

Contact: 734-615-9154, [email protected]

Alan Deardorff, professor of international economics and public policy, focuses on international trade. He co-developed the Michigan Model of World Production and Trade, which is used to estimate the effects of trade agreements. He has served as a consultant to the U.S. departments of Commerce, Labor, State and Treasury and to international organizations including the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the World Bank.

Contact: 734-764-6817, [email protected]

Health Care

Marie O’Neill, associate professor of environmental health sciences and epidemiology at the School of Public Health, studies health effects of air pollution, temperature extremes and climate change; environmental exposure assessment; and environmental equity and susceptible populations. She has worked for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pan American Health Organization and National Institute of Public Health (Mexico).

“Scientists agree that climate change and environmental pollution threaten our health and economy,” she said. “I would encourage the new administration to seek guidance from a diverse set of people with wisdom and experience in research and policy on these issues, and not take hasty action that may risk dismantling or reversing progress toward protecting our planet for future generations.”

Contact: 734-615-5135, [email protected]

Richard Hirth, professor and chair of the Department of Health Management and Policy at the School of Public Health, and member of the Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, can discuss the economics of health insurance, health care costs and payment system design.

“Aspects of the ACA intended to enhance the value of care by changing incentives and restructuring care delivery receive much less attention than provisions expanding coverage,” he said. “Many of these efforts may be able to receive bipartisan support and should be carefully considered as part of the ‘replace’ in ‘repeal and replace.'”

Contact: 734-936-1306, [email protected]

Scott Greer, associate professor of health management and policy at the School of Public Health, also is a political scientist. He researches the politics of health policies and has recently published on the politics of managing Zika and Ebola.

Contact: 734-936-1217, [email protected]

Dr. John Ayanian, director of the Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, the Alice Hamilton Professor of Internal Medicine and professor of public health and public policy, is a longtime researcher on how access to health insurance affects individuals’ access to health care, the quality of care they receive and their health outcomes. He leads IHPI’s federally approved objective evaluation of the Healthy Michigan Plan, the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.

Contact: 734-764-2220, [email protected]

Nicholas Bagley, professor in the Law School, concentrates his research on health care law, with a focus on Medicare and the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. He is also a frequent contributor to “The Incidental Economist,” a prominent health policy blog.

Contact: [email protected]

Peter Jacobson is a professor of health law and policy and director for the Center for Law, Ethics, and Health at the School of Public Health. He can address the legal aspects of dismantling the Affordable Care Act.

Contact: 734-936-0928, [email protected]

Immigration

Margo Schlanger, professor of law, is a leading authority on civil rights issues and served as the presidentially appointed officer for civil rights and civil liberties in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Contact: 734-615-2618, [email protected]

Silvia Pedraza, professor of sociology and American culture, studies the sociology of immigration as well as race and ethnicity in America. Her research seeks to understand the causes and consequences of immigration as a historical process that forms and transforms nations.

Contact: 734-647-3659, [email protected]

John García, professor emeritus at the Institute for Social Research and Center for Political Studies, can discuss the changing Latino vote.

Contact: 520-270-5538, [email protected]

Jason De Leon, assistant professor of anthropology, has worked for years researching the lives of undocumented migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexican border. “I think the fear of the Latino vote (and immigrants) was a motivating factor for a major block of Americans who traditionally don’t vote,” he said.

Contact: (814) 769-3706, [email protected]

Ann Lin, associate professor at the Ford School of Public Policy, has studied the most recent federal efforts to reform immigration policies.

Contact: 734-764-7507, [email protected]

Birthright Citizenship

Martha Jones, co-director of Michigan Law’s Program in Race, Law & History and associate professor of Afroamerican and African studies, has conducted research on the history of race, citizenship and slavery. She can discuss the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which established that everyone born in the U.S. is an American citizen.

Contact: 734-647-5421, [email protected]

Climate Change and the Environment

Stuart Batterman, professor of environmental health sciences at the School of Public Health, studies environmental assessment and impact and environmental management. His research is applied to contemporary problems including environmental justice and policy analysis. He holds a leadership role with the Michigan Center on Lifestage Environmental Exposures and Disease, which works to increase awareness and understanding of environmental public health among community members, policymakers and public health decision-makers at the local, regional, state and national level.

Contact: 734-763-2417, [email protected]

Andy Hoffman is the Holcim Professor of Sustainable Enterprise at the Ross School of Business and School of Natural Resources and Environment. He also serves as education director of the Graham Sustainability Institute. He can discuss the possible impacts of Trump’s election on environmental policy in the U.S. and globally.

“Trump’s election throws the future of environmental policy, both in the U.S. and globally, into confusion,” Hoffman said. “His stated and tweeted positions on climate change, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Paris climate accord, the Clean Power Plan and many other related issues suggest that the future of much of the programs and policies of the past administration, indeed many from administrations going back to President Nixon’s formation of the EPA, are in question.

“That said, Trump’s positions have been uneven and some seem to have been hastily announced, such as his tweet that climate change is a Chinese plot. Let’s wait and see how his positions solidify in the coming days of his administration. One aspect of Trump’s campaign has been his unpredictability.”

Hoffman has also written an essay in The Conversation entitled “Climate change and the presidential race: Lessons from the Reagan years.”

Contact: 734-763-9455, [email protected]

Joe Arvai, professor of natural resources and environment and business administration, is director of the Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise. His expertise is in the area of decision-making, corporate sustainability and the triple-bottom-line. Arvai can discuss the role of businesses in continuing to advance sustainability goals during the Trump administration.

“Many voters claimed they voted for Trump because of his business acumen. In reality, now more than ever before, there’s a real role for business to play both in advancing the sustainability goals set forth by the Obama administration and in keeping President-elect Trump honest,” Arvai said. “With an incoming presidential administration that is expected to be light in regulation and friendly to free market thinking, a significant amount of responsibility has fallen into the lap of the private sector to keep up the momentum of the past eight years.”

Arvai has also written a piece in Policy Options magazine titled “Do people vote with their hearts or their minds?“

Contact: 734-647-3891, 734-834-2075 (cell), [email protected]

Richard Rood is a professor of climate and space sciences and engineering and climate change blogger on Weather Underground and the American Meteorological Society’s Climate Policy Blog.

“President-elect Trump does not have a record on climate-change, nor does he have a known position on science policy in general. His past statements have not been consistently partisan. Therefore, the normal foundation of analysis and planning for the future does not exist. We do not know what Trump will advocate,” Rood said.

“The recognition of climate change as an issue that crosses party lines is growing; it is, really, only at the federal level that steadfast entrenchment remains. There are business interests to address climate change. There are Democratic, Republican and evangelical advocates for climate change policy at all levels. There is opportunity in Trump’s penchant to not be categorized and cast with his party, to break the partisan hold on climate change and, more generally, political dismissal of science-based knowledge. This would be a great step forward. Likewise there is extreme risk of undermining the laws of environmental regulation that were built with bipartisan support in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.”

Rood has also written a post on the Climate Policy Blog, “Salience on the Eve of the 2016 Election.”

Contact: 734-647-3530, [email protected]

Mark Barteau is director of the U-M Energy Institute, the DTE Energy Professor of Advanced Energy Research and a professor of chemical engineering. He can discuss what Trump can and can’t do with regard to dismantling the Obama administration’s steps toward reducing emissions, and also what steps he is likely to take.

“The Clean Power Plan has been stayed by the courts for the moment, but one should not forget that EPA’s responsibility to regulate CO2 emissions under the Clean Air Act was affirmed by the Supreme Court,” Barteau said. “This sets up a potential conflict among the executive, legislative and judicial branches. President Trump and a Republican-controlled Congress may hollow out and handcuff the EPA, but EPA’s responsibility to regulate greenhouse gases will remain unless existing law is modified by Congress or by a Supreme Court returned to full strength with Trump appointees.

“He pledged as a candidate to withdraw the U.S. from the climate agreements forged at last year’s Paris COP21 meeting, even as there is a growing global consensus that even more must be done to limit global warming and climate change. The Paris agreement states that parties cannot withdraw for three years and that an additional one-year waiting period is required. Whether President Trump will feel constrained by this or other international commitments, including NATO, remains to be seen.”

Barteau has also written an essay in The Conversation entitled “What President Trump means for the future of energy and climate.”

Contact: 734-763-7401, [email protected]

Working-Class Vote

Nadine Hubbs is a professor of women’s studies and music, faculty associate in American culture and director of the Lesbian-Gay-Queer Research Initiative. Her research focuses on gender and queer studies, 20th- and 21st-century U.S. culture, and social class in popular and classical music. Her latest book, “Rednecks, Queers, and Country Music,” combines musicological, social and historical perspectives on American country music to historicize and challenge current constructions of the working-class homophobe.

“There’s good evidence that the results of this election cannot be explained by pointing to the white working class, although we’ll hear that story time and again in the coming days,” she said. “What could be most useful, but we are not likely to hear, is representative working-class views from working-class people. We know by now the crucial importance of who speaks for whom, but we have yet to apply that knowledge in the case of the white working class.”

Contact: 734-355-2963, [email protected]

Treatment of Women

Karen Fournier, associate professor of music theory at the U-M School of Music, Theatre & Dance, studies feminism and issues surrounding societal expectations of, and limits placed upon, female behavior through the lens of punk music. “In this election, women—not just Clinton, but almost every woman referenced in the election—have been vilified for the very things that female punk artists in the first wave of the genre sought to point out in their songs. Note how Trump not only treated Clinton during the campaign—dismissing her as a ‘nasty woman,’ for example—but also how he dismissed any female who dared to stand up to him as ‘pigs’ or ‘slobs’ or as the types of women that he would never ‘go for,’ she said.

“And, of course, the most obvious point to make is that Clinton’s voice became an important feature of the election, too, even when captured in still photographs by the Trump campaign, her face was often contorted unattractively into what appeared to be a yell. This representation of Clinton as aggressive and, thereby, unappealing is reflected in a punk performance aesthetic that invited women to make the kinds of sounds that were typically ‘forbidden’ as a way to resist the silencing of their gender.”

Contact: 734-730-4475, [email protected]