About work to improve controls to keep drugs from disappearing from va facilities. Live coverage here on cspan3. And now a forum on how gender and race affected the president ial election. The trump cabinet choices and the 115th congress, authors in academics from Case Western Reserve University and university of minnesota take part. As all of us know, who are here in the United States, or even abroad, during the fall of 2016 we had a campaign that was permeated by issues of gender and race and class. We had a woman at the top of the democratic ticket for the first time. We had a billionaire at the top of the republican ticket who had a discourse of strong populism and classbased discourse. Also in this campaign we saw differences from campaigns in the near past in that sex and race entered into the discourse in new and different ways. Sexism and racism in particular were overtly discussed by candidates in ways that and perpetrated by candidates in ways that we had not seen in previous campaigns. Thats not to say previous campaigns did not have sexism and racism, but rarely did we hear sexist and racist comments coming from the candidates themselves. In part due to the campaign, and the ways in which gender and race played into that campaign, we expect gender and race to play large roles in the 45th president ial administration. We already see, for example, today, in terms of policy, donald trump promising to make an executive order to build a wall along the u. S. mexican border. We saw last weekend responses from Civil Society with regard to gender and gender equality, between 3 and 4 Million People marching across america, in response to the administration and for gender equality. So we already see important dynamics of race and gender, and all of this comes into a political context that for the past eight years or more has been one of increasing polarization of our two principle Political Parties. So the panel today takes on that dynamic and interrogates the relationship between gender and race and partisan politics and what we might expect in the 45th president ial administration. I have three esteemed panelists, im going to introduce them altogether now. They will each then present for 15 minutes and then we will open it up to discussion. The panelists that we have, our first panelist is enid logan, associate professor of sociology here at the university of minnesota. Ive asked professor logan to start off our panel because her expertise is in electoral politics and campaigns in particular. She is well known for her 2011 book called at this defining moment Barack Obamas candidacy and looks specifically at the 2016 campaign and young peoples perceptions of gender and race in that campaign. Our second speaker will be professor Karen Beckwith in the middle of the table here. Professor beckwith joins us today having traveled from cleveland, ohio, where she is a professor at Case Western Reserve University. She is the floor stone professor and chair of the department of Political Science there. Professor beckwith is well known for her work and Womens Movement in gender and Party Leadership. She comes to us with research that is in progress, a book almost complete, called cabinets, ministers and gender. And this book compares the process of cabinet appointments and seven advanced industrialized countries. And what that the implications of that process is for the presence of women in those cabinets. So she will present that research and is open to questions in the dialogue period about how her Research Findings inform how we understand the cabinet appointment process that we have been witnessing over the past couple of weeks of our new president ial administration. And our third speaker will be kathryn pearson, associate professor of Political Science, also here from the university of minnesota. She is an expert in u. S. Congressional politics. In particular the dynamics of gender and partisanship in the congress. She published widely in this area with her most recent book being published in 2015 Party Discipline in the house representatives. Shell give us some background on gender and race in todays the newly elected 115th congress and what we might expect in the future as we move into this congress and this administration. Now, ill turn it over to professor logan. Hello. All right. So im going to im being timed. Im also going to try to time myself here. So here we are. Five days after the inauguration. To discuss the recent president ial election and the new administration, and im excited to be a part of this conversation. Thank you all for inviting me. So what im going to do today is present some very preliminary results from a study that my Research Team and i are working on at present on the dynamics of race, immigration and gender in the 2016 president ial election. So this study is very much still in progress, were still conducting interviews, and therefore not begun to conduct in depth analyses of the data. But there are a few trends i can point out and some really fascinating stuff coming up in the interviews and im going to share some of that with you. So what im going to do in the time that i have is provide some background on me, the genesis of the study, discuss the study design and central questions and then im going to give you some overview characteristics of the sample, and offer some quotes from a few respondents. So do not expect a lot of analysis trends, we dont have trends yet but we have interesting stuff. I also would like to acknowledge there are six members of my Research Team are here right now, so thank you all for coming. Okay. And for your work on this. So im a sociologist here at the university of minnesota, been here about 12 years and primarily i study Race Relations in blackness in the contemporary u. S. I was asked to look at race and gender and politics during Barack Obamas first run for the white house. And i started two parallel studies on race, blackness, gender and politics in 2008. First was based on analysis of newspaper articles, blogs and other forms of public commentary, where pundits, reporters and bloggers furiously debated the racial meaning of obamas candidacy, and his presidency for the u. S. , and for whites in particular and for black politics, et cetera, and asked what kind of black person is he, dowhat does this mean fo the u. S. I wrote a book based on the analysis of this which came out in 2011. And in it the same time i also started an interviewbased study called youth speak, which is parallel to the work that i am doing to present today. And rather than focussing on the news media and online platforms, it was based on an in depth series of in depth interviews with College Students here at the u, and i had found that as i was doing my mediabased research on the election, i was having all these really interesting conversations with people about what the election meant to them. I wanted to talk to individuals, in their everyday lives, and try to capture some of that. And so the results of these interviews were presented in a number of presentations, papers, some of it was articles and some of it was incorporated into the book as well. All right. So if we go forward to today, i wasnt planning to study race, gender and electoral politics again in 2016. I moved on to some really interesting work on race and here is a little bit on the slide. But issues of race, immigration and gender became more and more central to the 2016 election, and to the candidacies of trump and clinton, i was drawn to write and speak about and study these issues again. So i have become really fascinated with president ial politics as a medium for looking at the transformation of racial discourse because of the very intense and focused manner in which elections refrac conversations about race and general terder and immigration r related issues and it seemed to me pretty early into trumps candidacy that he was running on a White Nationalist light platform and that this was resonating really strongly with his supporters, and then when he started blowing his opponents out of the water, one after the other, with his rhetoric on muslims, and on mexicans, and terrorism, and calling to build a wall, and in spite of or maybe because of his critical comments about womens personalities and their physical characteristics, i was, like, wow, okay, there is definitely something here to make sense of and to parse through. So i have been working on and thinking about in a focused way race, gender and immigration in the election since late last spring. So i did an article for a british publication and for a blog founded by the former president of the asa, joe fagan, i did a talk at the ias here and a panel looking at gender and race in september. I was interviewed by the Washington Post for a story about the meaning of the slogan make America Great again and by usa today, a few days after the election, on the proliferation of hate speech and racist graffiti in the u. S. Are what aziz ansari called kkk light on saturday night live last weekend. So, anyway, in this time i started to put together the present study. Perspectives on the 2016 president ial election, and i mentioned that there was all this stuff coming out about race and immigration and gender and trumps rhetoric in particular seemed to really strongly resound with the supporters and really strongly repel those who were opposed to him, including the press in general. I wanted to make sense of this. How did we go from our fist black president to someone who seems to be running on a White Nationalist platform. The members of the press were developing their own views of what was happening and what explains it. Some of it might be based on one in Depth Profile of an individual person they sat down with for over the course of several days, or maybe they did snippets of interviews with a bunch of different people at a rally. But i wanted to look at this more systematically, using in depth interviews with a large sample of respondents and i wanted to be able to trace how different ideas and sentiments were or were not connected in their minds and to explore points of contradiction or conflict in their world views as well, and the best way to do this is through in depth interviews. All right. So early in the fall of 2016 i began to assemble my team of Research Assistants and there are currently 20 of us, altogether. Mostly sociology, graduate students and advance undergraduate students. And proposed study of College Student views on the election. Im going to ill tell you a little bit about why we chose to do College Students in the q an a if we have time for that. It allows for comparisens with the earlier study i did and a matter of logistics, we wanted to do the interviews in a very compressed time frame, and we knew we had ready access to university students. So the Research Team is comprised of seven africanamerican interviewers including me, six u. S. Born white interviewers, four asian or asianamerican interviewers, two la tetina and one native american. And we have done interviewer, interviewee race matching as much as possible. We solicited participation from undergraduate students here at the university of minnesota, which is a mostly liberal leaning campus. And at bethel university, this is a christian evangelical college that leans more conservative. It is about half and half and i can tell you a little bit more about the uniqueness of doing research at bethel later as well. So we were especially interested in gaining an oversample of certain student populations including black students, first generation immigrant students, first and Second Generation asianamerican students, muslim students, right or conservative leaning students and therefore we conducted targeting recruitment at different student groups. We conducted professors at a number of dichb departmefferent around the u and recruited from 15 different courses so far. And we posted flyers around campus. So as i mentioned before, were still collecting data, and have not formally begun the analysis, ill tell you some things about the sample and present some quotes from a few of their interviews. How are we on time . Oh, my goodness. All right. Soso far we have 85 interviews completed. 68 at the u of m and 17 at bethel, this table is the separated data but im going to be giving you the combined data. Students at the u are generally liberal, left leaning where as at bethel were close to 50 50 split. So far our sample is just over half white overall about 55 due to our strong oversampling of students of color. About a fourth of our students are of african descent. All right. So the study questions. After we ascertained basic demographic information on the respondents including their primary political and religious affiliation, we asked questions that are broken into a number of categories. And they include, how do you feel about the outcome of the election, what is the outcome tell you about this country or the American People, what explains why trump won in your view and can you provide us with several adjectives to describe Hillary Clinton or donald trump . There are lots of questions about race, such as Trumps Campaign slogan was make America Great again, what does that mean. Do you think it has anything specifically to do with race, gender and immigration, what do you think explained trumps strong support among the White Working Class and among College Educated whites. And why did so many white evangelicals vote for trump. Im going to skip over some of these other questions, we asked them about specific populations of color. Latinos, black voter and et cetera. We also say most critiques of trump as racist have come from the left. Does the left itself have a race problem in your view or mostly a problem on the right . And then about a third of the questions on the study are about gender. We asked, do you think that gender works in trumps favor in the election and we asked a similar question about Hillary Clinton. Is the u. S. Ready for a female president in your view, what kind of model of masculinity or manhood does trump represent, and does he present a strong model of christian man hood, thats what we asked of the bethel students. And in closing, we asked things like how do you think the country will change under the Trump Administration, what are your greatest hopes and fears for yourself or for other groups of people, and what do we do next as a country. How do we move forward from here. So i am very low on time, but im just going to present you with some quotes from a few of the respondents. Okay. So first we have scott, who is a conservative white male at the u, who was interviewed by steven. What do you think of the outcome of the election . Hes from a middle class background, happy with republicans sweeping all levels of government except for trump, a never trumper and doesnt like had him now. He said. I think the election was a resounding success other than the fact that donald won, i didnt like donald, i never wanted to vote for him, but i do like that there is a republican at the president ial home so that we can get Supreme Court appointments and a ridiculously huge appointment. We asked him what does the outcome of the election tell you about the country or the American People and he says, i think more than anything it tells us that the forgotten part of america is being brought into the national spectrum, like the flyover states. I think that a lot of the poor people that have been stepped over, people who didnt have a voice are starting to have a voice again. He said, but i think there was racist sentiments when it comes to the muslim ban and the wall. The wall is like the stupidest thing, but people kind of got swayed by donald. Why did trump win in your view . He says, the flyover states did it for him, another reason i think that donald won is that hillary was just an awful candidate. The democrats have obama, like a cool black guy, hes going, like, on social media and visiting youtubers doing all these cool things and connecting with young people, and i think that Democratic Party made a mistake when they replaced a cool charismatic black guy with a white old lady. If that makes any sense. Who wasnt very charismatic, and many people, like myself, would see her as robotic. I asked him do you think there are any groups of people that will be particularly disadvantaged under the Trump Administration . So listen to what he says, he says, muslims and hispanics are going to be at a disadvantage when he started perpetuating the idea that every muslim is a terrorist and kept talking about the wall, that had a definite impact. I think a lot of prejudices are going to be coming forward but wont be disenfranchised politically. No policies will come forward that will put them at any disadvantage, same as gay people. There will be more prejudice in the public populist but no disadvantage in terps of policy. There was liz, a democratic socialist, and a white female lesbian at the u who briefly said she cried for two hours after the election was finalized, and here, as is typical, she said she was not at all a strong clinton supporter, mostly just against trump. As for what the election says about the can country for her, she said it clearly shows that the country is far more racist than she ever thought it was, and that people like her must be a lot more passive than she thought. Now, here is an interesting thing about her from her in terms of adjecti