Poll Results:

• I like it. The unions need to be reined in (78%)
• Something needs to be done with the unions, but this is a little harsh (3%)
• Hate it. These are dedicated public servants (19%)

Vote here or read more: http://bit.ly/efsAJQ

On September 30, 2010, Rasmussen Reports, the nation’s preeminent polling agency, released its latest poll on the Wisconsin United States Senate race.  In this poll, Rasmussen found that Ron Johnson increased his lead over Senator Russ Feingold by five points—jumping from seven points two weeks ago to twelve points.

Ron Johnson currently has a 54% to 42% lead over the four term incumbent Russ Feingold.  So long as Ron Johnson stays on message and a major scandal is not revealed, he will likely defeat Russ Feingold in the United States Senate race.

Senator Feingold’s recent downfall in the polls is due largely to his negative campaign advertisements, his barrage of character attacks against Ron Johnson, his inability to clearly articulate his message and platform, and his liberal voting record.

Conversely, Mr. Johnson’s upsurge is attributed to his outsider status, his ability to raise and spend significant amounts of money on advertising and, most importantly, he has developed a comprehensive plan for economic recovery and job creation.

As aforementioned in previous PAI publications, 2010 is a demonstrably bad year for incumbents and establishment candidates.  Ron Johnson’s outsider status is the driving force behind his success in this must win United States Senate race.  Wisconsinites have come to the realization that there are two Russ Feingold’s: Russ Feingold the campaigner, who plays the role of the moderate and man of the people; and Russ Feingold the Senator, who has one of the most liberal voting records in the United States Senate.

Additionally, Russ Feingold’s party loyalty score (the percentage of time in which he has agreed with the party position on specific issues) is 96%.

With just thirty days left until the election, it appears as though conservatives are going to score a knockout blow by defeating one of the United States Senate’s most liberal members, Senator Feingold.

As a result of Ron Johnson’s resounding success in this poll, Rasmussen has now moved this race into the leans Republican category.  Throughout the duration of this campaign, the seat had been either a toss-up or leans Democrat, but thanks to the superb campaign being run by Ron Johnson, the race now favors the GOP candidate.

Had the Republican Party run any other candidate, excluding Tommy Thompson, the results would be very different.  In fact, had Dave Westlake won the Republican Primary, Russ Feingold would be leading this race by a significant percentage.   Ron Johnson’s charisma, coupled with his personal wealth, conservative convictions and outsider status has allowed him to gain the upper hand in this race.  It is imperative to note that there are still thirty days left before the general election and anything can happen.

While this poll provides Wisconsinites with a general overview on the state of the United States Senate race, it does lack optimal polling accuracy.

Rasmussen surveyed 750 likely, not registered, voters and relied heavily on telephone surveys.  As noted in PAI’s Wisconsin Gubernatorial Candidate Showcase, surveys done by landline phones are not an accurate gauge of voter attitudes, due to the fact that senior citizens and females have a greater tendency to use landline phones than millennials and males.

A paltry sample size, coupled with a relatively high margin of error, +/-4makes this poll relatively inaccurate, but more accurate than the previous poll, in which the margin of error was 4.5%.  In each analysis PAI has penned thus far on the gubernatorial and United States Senate contests, an issue has been made of sample sizes and margins of error.  This is done to educate about the intricacies of polling and how to gauge whether or not a poll is an accurate representation of the electorate.

If a poll is to be deemed accurate, the sample size must exceed 1,500 registered voters.  Additionally, polling agencies should sample those from different backgrounds and socioeconomic classes.  In order to accurately gauge the views of the electorate, it is of paramount importance that leading polling agencies, mainly Rasmussen and Gallup, increase their sample sizes.

As new polls and information about the Wisconsin United States Senate race become available, PAI will keep you abreast.

The poll can be viewed at: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/wisconsin/election_2010_wisconsin_senate

Previous Polling Analysis on this campaign can be read at www.PaxAmericanaInstitute.org.

The latest Rasmussen Reports poll, released on September 17, 2010, shows Ron Johnson, an Oshkosh business executive and political outsider, defeating incumbent Democrat Russ Feingold, 51% to 44%.

In last month’s poll, Johnson held a miniscule one point lead, 47% to 46%, with a four percent margin of error. Now, one month later, after both candidates easily won their primaries, and the national parties are spending copious amounts of money to elect their candidates, Ron Johnson has pulled ahead in this ever-important Senate race.

Johnson’s lead in this poll is attributed to what Rasmussen dubs “leaners.” Leaners, for those unfamiliar with this political vernacular, are those who initially indicated no preference for either Feingold or Johnson but have recently decided to support a candidate. Rasmussen contends that many of those who were initially undecided in this race have indicated that they prefer Ron Johnson over Russ Feingold. Rasmussen Reports, in its analysis of the Wisconsin Senate race, writes, “When leaners are excluded from the totals, Johnson leads Feingold 50% to 43%. Even when leaners are excluded from the polls, Ron Johnson still holds a significant lead over Russ Feingold.” As these numbers indicate, it appears as though Ron Johnson is going to defeat Russ Feingold on November 2, 2010. If that is the case, Ron Johnson will become the first Republican Wisconsinite since Robert Kasten, 1986-1993, to occupy a seat in the United States Senate.

Aside from the support of leaners, Johnson’s recent success is attributed to his outsider status, his penchant for running positive television advertisements that highlight his record rather than denigrate that of his opponent, his enormous fundraising prowess and, lastly, the electorate’s disdain with the current political establishment.

In addition to polling voters on whom they prefer in the general election, Rasmussen also examines the favorability and unfavorability ratings of the two candidates. Rasmussen finds that sixty-one percent of Wisconsinites view Ron Johnson favorably, and just thirty-three have an unfavorable opinion of him. Conversely, fifty one percent of voters have a favorable opinion of Russ Feingold, and a whopping forty-six percent have an unfavorable opinion of him. For a three term incumbent these favorability/unfavorability ratings are abysmal.

Feingold, if he intends to win the general election, must reconsider his campaign strategy and focus more on his record than attacking Ron Johnson. Despite Ron Johnson’s seven point lead over Russ Feingold, Rasmussen still categorizes the Wisconsin Senate race as a “toss up.” This designation is due largely to the fact that Wisconsin is, and in recent times has been the epitome of a swing state. In both the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, the margin of victory for the winning candidate was less than one percent. In fact, in 2004, John Kerry defeated George W. Bush by a meager 0.4% in the popular vote. As the reader can discern, even though Ron Johnson holds a seven point lead over Russ Feingold victory is far from assured. As the election nears, expect national pundits and media outlets to remain fixated on this hypercritical United States Senate race.

Much like the August 2010 poll, Rasmussen surveyed 750 likely, not registered voters, and relied heavily on telephone surveys. As noted in our analysis of the Wisconsin gubernatorial poll, surveys done by landline phones are not an accurate gauge of voter attitudes, due to the fact that senior citizens and females have a greater tendency to use landline phones than millennials and males. A paltry sample size, coupled with a relatively high margin of error, +/-4.5%, makes this poll relatively inaccurate.

In each analysis piece that PAI has penned thus far on the gubernatorial and United States Senate contests, an issue has been made of sample sizes and margins of error. We do this to educate non-political science majors about the intricacies of polling and how to gauge whether or not a poll is an accurate representation of the electorate. As noted in several prior documents, if a poll is to be deemed accurate the sample size must exceed 1,500 registered voters. Additionally, polling agencies should sample those from different backgrounds and socioeconomic classes. In order to accurately gauge the views of the electorate, it is of paramount importance that leading polling agencies, mainly Rasmussen and Gallup to increase their sample sizes. While this poll provides Wisconsinites with a general overview on the state of the United States Senate race, it is lacks accuracy and validity. As new polls and information about the Wisconsin United States Senate race become available, PAI will keep you abreast.

On August 27, 2010, Rasmussen Reports released its latest poll on the Wisconsin gubernatorial race.  This poll indicates that both Republican candidates remain ahead of Democratic frontrunner Tom Barrett but only by a small amount.  This poll differs from the many others conducted since January 2010, in that Mark Neumann is now statistically polling as the frontrunner.

In a head-to-head matchup, Mark Neumann leads Tom Barrett 48% to 44%, with 3% of voters preferring another candidate.  Conversely, Scott Walker, the WI-GOP endorsed candidate, and the perennial frontrunner, leads Barrett in a head-to-head matchup, 47% to 44%, with 4% preferring another candidate.

As noted, for the first time since polling began in January, Mark Neumann is now the frontrunner in this hotly contested race.  Walker’s percentage of the vote decreased by three points since last month’s poll.  The July 30, 2010, Rasmussen poll indicated that Scott Walker became the first candidate to reach the 50% threshold.  Walker’s decrease in this latest poll was precipitated by a poor performance in the three GOP gubernatorial debates in August, the electorate’s chagrin with establishment candidates and Mr. Walker’s penchant for polemical attacks against his opponent’s character.

Conversely, Mark Neumann’s release of a book detailing his agenda for Wisconsin’s economic growth, coupled with his strong performance in the Republican debates, and the endorsement of former Representative and television pundit Joe Scarborough, has allowed him to nudge past both Walker and Barrett in the ongoing campaign.

The Wisconsin gubernatorial election is poised to be one of the closest and most highly anticipated elections in 2010.  Rasmussen has altered its classification of this race from leans Republican, to “a tossup.”  Barrett’s success in this race stems partly from the fact that Wisconsin, since 1984, has been a Democratic leaning state and partly from the  fact that he lacks a credible primary challenger.   For the fifth consecutive month, it appears as though the Republican Party is poised to win back the statehouse in November.

The August 27 poll, much like the July 30 poll, had a sample size of 750 likely voters.  The August 27 poll, however, despite having a larger sample size than polls conducted in previous months, still fails to meet most polling standards of legitimacy.  If a poll is to be considered an accurate indicator of an electoral outcome, the sample size must exceed 1,500.  None of the Wisconsin gubernatorial polls conducted by Rasmussen, or the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute thus far, have had a sample size of over 750.  A small sample size allows pollsters to judge the mood of the electorate and their feelings on specific candidates, but as aforementioned, may neither accurately predict the outcome of the September 14, 2010, Republican primary nor the November 2, 2010, general election.

As the reader could see from this poll, voter opinions of the three major candidates have changed dramatically in the past month.  The electorate’s view of candidates often fluctuates, due mainly to specific statements made by candidates or their performance in debates.  It is hypercritical to note that polls with sample sizes than 1,500 are purely speculative and lack standing and precision.  The race remains anyone’s match at this point.

As new polls and information on the election become available, PAI will keep you abreast. 

Download this Campaign Snap-Shot Series

The 2010 Wisconsin Senate Race: A Methodical Analysis.

Issue Highlights

***Section 1

Senate frontrunners Russ Feingold and Ron Johnson are becoming more visceral in their attacks on one another.  With the Wisconsin Senate race officially a “dead heat,” both Ron Johnson and Russ Feingold are intensifying their rhetoric and tone.

***Section 2

Dave Westlake, Ron Johnson and Russ Feingold have placed an unprecedented emphasis on online social networking, trumping traditional campaign methods such as: mass mailings, yard signs, and telephone calls.

***Section 3

The latest Rasmussen poll denotes a modest change in candidate preference.  For the second straight month, Rasmussen polling reports that Ron Johnson, a political outsider and business leader, is narrowly defeating four-term incumbent Russ Feingold.

***Section 4

Russ Feingold’s voting record reflects that he is neither a fiscal conservative nor a moderate. 

Section 1

With the Wisconsin Senate race officially a “dead heat,” both Ron Johnson, and Russ Feingold are intensifying their rhetoric and tone.

In recent weeks, Wisconsin U.S. Senate candidates Russ Feingold and Ron Johnson have become more visceral in their attacks upon one another.  Rather than focusing on seminal policy issues, and their plans for economic recovery, they have resorted to vitriolic harangues and polemical attacks on the other’s character.

The campaign began to take on a visceral tone early last month when Rasmussen reported that this race was a statistical dead heat.  For just the second time in his storied political career, Senator Russ Feingold is vulnerable.  As a result, he initiated a series of blatantly erroneous attack ads pertaining to Ron Johnson’s positions on critical policy issues; mainly, drilling for oil in the Great Lakes and Social Security reform.  For instance, in one of his earliest advertisements, Senator Feingold argued that Ron Johnson would “hand over the Great Lakes to big-oil companies.”  Sen. Feingold’s attack ad was erroneous in that Mr. Johnson had stated on numerous occasions he is fundamentally opposed to drilling for oil in the Great Lakes, to say nothing of the fact drilling is already illegal in the Lakes.  In fact, Russ Feingold was the only Great Lakes Senator to vote against the Great Lakes Compact—the measure that sought to protect the Great Lakes from commercial drilling.  FactCheck.org has also noted that Feingold’s advertisement was blatantly false.

In response to Sen. Feingold’s advertisement, Mr. Johnson issued a scathing rebuttal in which he contended that Russ Feingold has been a career politician whose sole interest is his own political fortunes.  Russ Feingold then abandoned his infamous heartwarming, feel-good biography advertisements and began a character assassinations of Mr. Johnson.

Ron Johnson, despite running a more positive campaign thus far, has still spent more money attacking Sen. Feingold than he has on promoting his agenda for restoring American prosperity.  In this time of economic tumult, it is paramount that political candidates refrain from mudslinging and, instead, focus on their proposals for restoring American Exceptionalism.

Section 2

Dave Westlake, Ron Johnson and Russ Feingold have placed an unprecedented emphasis on online social networking, trumping traditional campaign methods such as: mass mailings, yard signs, and telephone calls.

For the first time in the history of Wisconsin politics, social networking is the primary medium for voter outreach.  Social Networking tools such as Facebook and Twitter, while having been in existence since 2004 and 2006, respectively, were not a prominent part of the 2006 U.S. Senate election, in which the Republican Party failed to recruit a viable challenger against Senator Herb Kohl.  In that election, neither Kohl nor Lorge barraged the state with television or radio commercials, rob calls, yard signs, or mass mailings.

Each of the candidates vying for the position of United States Senator is running a media savvy, social network based campaign.  The 2010 United States Senate election in unique in that neither of the three major candidates has barraged the state with signs, billboards or mass mailings, all three of which have long been the preferred methods of voter outreach.  Instead, Sen. Feingold, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Westlake have made technology, mainly social networking and campaign advertisements, the focal point of this campaign. As of August 16, 2010, Ron Johnson, the Republican frontrunner, has nearly 8,000 fans on Facebook and has released five television commercials.  Mr. Johnson’s Republican opponent, Dave Westlake, has 2,034 fans on Facebook and has yet to release a television commercial, while Russ Feingold has nearly 23,000 fans on his Facebook page and has run four television commercials.

As the reader can discern, Sen. Feingold, Mr. Westlake and Mr. Johnson have focused more of their resources on new media and social networking than traditional methods of voter outreach. In fact, PAI’s policy staff has yet to see a single yard or highway sign for any of the three major candidates.  It appears that the traditional methods of voter outreach, yard signs, mass mailings and phone calls have gone by the wayside in this competitive U.S. Senate race.

Dr. Richard Semiatin, a professor of Political Science at American University in Washington, D.C., recently edited a fascinating tome entitled Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, in which he and his contemporaries argued that social networking and media-based campaigns are the “new wave of the future.”  Furthermore, Dr. Semiatin asserted that campaigns will begin to abandon traditional methods of voter outreach due to the ease and efficiency of new media.

Since the publication of this book in late 2007, Dr. Semiatin’s assertion that mass media and social networking would come to dominate American political campaigns have proven to be accurate.  With the general election just two months away, voters should expect the candidates to exert even greater energy in online for to try and convince voters that they are the superior candidate in this competitive race.  As a result, the candidates will begin spending more money on television and radio advertisements, as well as increasing their presence on the internet, especially on social networking websites.

Section 3

With the U.S. economy dwindling on the brink of calamity, and the United States mired in two wars, the electorate is demanding a change in the national political climate.  As a result, many leading incumbents, including Wisconsin’s Russ Feingold, are finding themselves vulnerable.

For the third consecutive month, Rasmussen, the nation’s largest and most preeminent polling agency, has reported that Ron Johnson, a political outsider, leads his opponent, Democratic incumbent Russ Feingold, by a miniscule margin: 47% to 46%.

Technically, the race is a tie, due to the fact that the margin of error exceeds Johnson’s margin of victory over Russ Feingold.  The August 2010 Rasmussen poll denotes little change in the mood of the WI electorate, or in candidate preference.  For the past five months, Russ Feingold’s percentage of support in the Rasmussen polls has been a steady 46%.  Conversely, Ron Johnson, since winning the nomination of the Republican Party at its convention in May, has seen his percentage of the vote fluctuate from 49% to 47% in recent months.

In each of the last three polls, the race has been a statistical dead heat, with the margin of error exceeding Johnson’s margin of victory.  The August 2010 Rasmussen poll, despite being a dead heat, provides political analysts with enlightening information.  First, 57% of Wisconsin voters believe that the economy is in a state of disarray, whereas just 4% believe the economy is on the right track.

Among those who believe the economy is in a state of utter disrepair, roughly 65% support the Republican nominee, whoever it will be.  On the other hand, those who assert that the economy is on the right track overwhelmingly support Democratic incumbent Russ Feingold.

Secondly, aside from the economy, a significant portion of those surveyed said that health care, entitlements and victory in the Middle East remain the most pressing issues facing the United States in the years ahead.  On each of those issues, voters support the Republican candidate over Sen. Feingold.  Rasmussen noted that 85% of those who oppose ObamaCare support Ron Johnson; whereas, just 69% support Mr. Dave Westlake.

Lastly, Independents and non-affiliated voters, the catalyst for Barack Obama in 2008, are abandoning the Democratic Party in droves in 2010.  Rasmussen noted that Ron Johnson leads Russ Feingold among Independents, 53% to 46%.  With the U.S. economy dwindling on the brink of calamity, and the United States mired in two wars, the electorate is vying for “real” political change.  As a result, many leading incumbents, including Wisconsin’s own Russ Feingold, find themselves vulnerable in 2010.

Section 4

Russ Feingold’s voting record reflects that he is neither a fiscal conservative nor a moderate.

Since his inauguration into the world’s most exclusive club, the United States Senate, Russ Feingold has sought to portray himself as a moderate, fiscally conservative “man of the people.”  Russ Feingold’s voting record, however, reflects that he is anything but a fiscal conservative, or for that matter, a moderate.

For nearly a decade, Russ Feingold has been one of the more liberal members of the United States Senate.  The intention of this section is to alert the electorate of key votes taken by Senator Feingold during his three terms in the U.S. Senate.  Feingold, as aforementioned, portrays himself as a voice of reason who is always looking out for the best interest of Wisconsinites.  His voting record, especially on social and national security issues may prove otherwise.

Key votes by Russ Feingold that went against the wishes of his constituents:

• Defense of Marriage Act: In 1996, Russ Feingold was one of just fourteen senators to vote against the Defense of Marriage Act, a bill which his constituents overwhelmingly supported.  The Defense of Marriage Act sought to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
• The USA PATRIOT ACT: Russ Feingold was the only Senator to oppose the USA PATRIOT ACT.  Immediately following the heinous attacks of September 11, 2001, Russ Feingold chose to put his liberal partisan interests ahead of protecting American security.
• The Graham-Leach-Bailey Act: The Graham-Leach-Bailey Act, herein referred to as GLB, sought to repeal key elements of the Glass Steagall Act of 1933.  The GLB Act allowed commercial banks, investments banks, security firms, and insurance companies to consolidate.  Feingold, a self-proclaimed fiscal conservative, argued that this legislation provided the financial industry with too much authority.
• The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2005: After the passage of the Arizona Immigration legislation, S.B. 1070, in early July, it appears as though immigration reform will be a focal point of the 2010 elections.  In 2005, Russ Feingold was one of 65 senators to support the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2005.  This legislation sought to double the number of H-1B visas from 65,000 to 115,000, with an automatic increase of 20% increase every year.

Key votes by Russ Feingold that supported the wishes of his constituents.

• The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program), and The Final Reform Act of 2010. Senator Feingold was one of the only Senate Democrats to oppose these pork laden economic reform bills.  Senator Feingold should be lauded by fiscal conservatives for opposing these egregious spending bills. 
• ObamaCare: Russ Feingold, since being elected in 1992, has been an ardent supporter of universal, or government run, health care.  Senator Feingold, in a 2010 press release, indicated that his vote against ObamaCare stemmed from his chagrin with the fact it did not include universal coverage. 
• The Confirmation of Timothy Geithner: Russ Feingold was one of just four liberal Senators to oppose the nomination of Timothy Geithner to the position of Secretary of the Treasury.  Feingold, despite agreeing with Geithner on the vast majority of policy issues, voted against him for personal reasons.  In a 2009 press release, Senator Feingold stated, “I am deeply troubled by his failure to pay the property taxes he owed, despite repeated alerts from his employer at the time, the International Monetary Fund, that he was responsible for paying those taxes.” 

The votes analyzed above are just a select few of the thousands of votes cast by Russ Feingold during his year Senate career.  Throughout the duration of his tenure, he has accumulated one of the most liberal voting records and party loyalty scores: 96% (as of April 2010).

Aside from going against the grain on fiscal issues every now and then, Russ Feingold is an ardent liberal Democrat.  His liberal voting record, coupled with his wanton disregard for constituent viewpoints, has made Feingold one of the most vulnerable incumbents in the 2010 election cycle.  Prior to stepping into the voter booth on November 2, 2010, it is paramount that Wisconsinites are informed as to where each of the candidates stands on critical policy issues.  It is our hope that you turn to the Pax Americana Institute for information pertaining to the 2010 U.S. Senate Race, as well as the 2010 Wisconsin gubernatorial race. 

As a prelude to the Madison Tax Day TEA Party on the steps of the capitol, please join us to ensure our state’s conservative momentum remains strong throughout the year. 

RSVP TO: operations.intern@paxamerica.org.

Who: Group leaders representing believers in freedom, limited government and individual liberty. From Tea Party leaders to think tank, foundation, and PAC executives, we welcome your attendance.

What: Follow up Leadership Summit to finalize strategies from the November and January summits.

Where: Whyte, Hirschboeck and Dudek, S.C., 33 East Main Street, Suite 300, Madison. Adjacent to the Capitol.  Validated Parking (Directions see:  http://www.whdlaw.com/OfficeDetail.aspx?ID=7).

When: Wednesday, 14 April. 7pm-10pm.

Why: Organization and sharing of scarce resources are keys to success.

***If you are interested in having your organization’s events listed on a new statewide Master Calendar of Conservative Events — the new Wisconsin Conservative Alliance website– attendance at this summit is crucial to coordinate that process.***

For more information, contact Drew Davis, executive director, Pax Americana Institute, at execdirector@paxamerica.org.

The first in a new series of Institute easy-to-reads will be “10 Things Every Citizen Should Know About…The U.S. Constitution.” Available in print and on Amazon.com/books in the Fall of 2010.  Other PAI Publications.

All proceeds support the institute’s student internship program.

Administrative PAI Celebrated the Five Year Anniversary of its Founding on
November 26, 2009. PAI proudly welcomed former Wisconsin state representative J.A. “Doc” Hines to the Board. With a dramatic increase in day-to-day operations in 2009, the Institute expanded its administrative team by adding a Chief Operating Officer. We warmly welcome LTC. (ret.) Dan Zimmerman. Recognizing Wisconsin’s Tea Party movement was the crown jewel of national Tea Party movements, PAI inaugurated a new Opinion & Commentary division within the Institute. We warmly welcome Mr. Vince Trovato as Editor and leader of that team. To better provide policy analysis and publication, Pax Americana Institute installed a new Policy Director and Deputy Policy Director within its Political Analysis Division.

Internship Program PAXIP (Pax Americana Internship Program) launched a national recruitment campaign in 2009 to draw talent and insight from around our country by developing partnerships with numerous non-profit forums, notably Idealist.org.

Publications Identifying a major deficiency in national conservative dialogue at the collegiate level, PAI unveiled The Collegiate Conservative in the fall of 2009. It is the Midwest’s premier collegiate journal of conservative thought. TCC features the insight and commentary of Midwestern college conservatives as well as cutting-edge policy research compiled by our nation’s students. In the face of a national healthcare debate, PAI’s Policy Analysis Division released a brief assessing the failures of the public option. It became the Institute’s most viewed policy brief in 2009. Contributing a uniquely Midwestern perspective to the creation of U.S. foreign policy remains a top priority of PAI. Highlights of research and analysis from 2009 include:

 YEMEN: A THREAT ASSESSMENT.
 The Political Impact of Iran’s Youth And the Future of the Iranian Democracy.
 Iran: A Facade of Fear
 Profiling The Fox: A Counterintelligence Profile of Belgian Arms Trafficker Jacques Monsieur
 The U.S.–Australian Intelligence Sharing Relationship
 Pious Policy: The Influence of the U.S. Catholic Church on U.S. Foreign & National Security Policy
 Iran and the Foreign Powers: A History of Intervention

Fellows Program In 2009, PAI welcomed a new Contributing Fellow to its ranks who spent much of the year comparatively analyzing the nuclear strategies of recent presidents, including Mr. Obama’s, to ensure America remains protected in the face of new 21st century threats. This research will be available shortly. Pax Americana Institute Fellows also welcomed to Madison former National Security Advisor Richard V. Allen, from the Reagan Administration, for a lecture series on current U.S. security policy in the War on Terrorism.

For additional information on the annual operations of the Pax Americana Institute, please contact Mr. Drew Davis, executive director, at execdirector@paxamerica.org.

To see Reaching New Heights, 2008, click here.