The University of Rochester is one of the nation's leading private research universities, renowned for its commitment to innovation, interdisciplinary collaboration, and academic excellence. Guided by its motto, "Meliora"—Ever Better—the University fosters groundbreaking research and transformative education across its schools and centers.

University of Rochester

New Row

Contact expert @[Full Name](fullname), @[Job Title](job_title) at @[Organization](organization) for media, speaking, professional opportunities and more.

@[Full Name](fullname) at @[Organization](organization) | Contact Form

Expert Inquiry

Open Sans

Awarded by the American Political Science Association for "Rules and Restraint", the best publication in legislative studies by a young scholar during 2007 of importance to legislators and legislative staff and of merit in strengthening the practice of representative democracy.

Alan Rosenthal Prize

Awarded for distinguished service to Rochester University.

Goergen Award for Distinguished Achievement and Artistry in Undergraduate Education

The Mercatus Center at George Mason University : Mercatus Affiliated Scholar

American Politics Research : Editorial Board

Center for Competitive Politics : Board of Academic Advisors

Risky Business: Do Disclosure and Shareholder Approval of Corporate Political Contributions Affect Firm Performance?

Policy dynamics and electoral uncertainty in the appointments process

Using Item Response Theory to Improve Measurement in Strategic Management Research: an Application to Corporate Social Responsibility

State Constitutions and Fiscal Policy

Disclosing Disclosure:  Lessons from a “Failed” Field Experiment

Information at the Margin:  Campaign Finance Disclosure Laws, Ballot Issues, and Voter Knowledge

Campaign Finance and American Democracy: What the Public Really Thinks and Why It Matters

Government spending has increased dramatically in the United States since World War II despite the many rules intended to rein in the insatiable appetite for tax revenue most politicians seem to share. Drawing on examples from the federal and state governments, Rules and Restraint explains in lucid, nontechnical prose why these budget rules tend to fail, and proposes original alternatives for imposing much-needed fiscal discipline on our legislators. One reason budget rules are ineffective, David Primo shows, is that politicians often create and preserve loopholes to protect programs that benefit their constituents. Another reason is that legislators must enforce their own provisions, an arrangement that is seriously compromised by their unwillingness to abide by rules that demand short-term sacrifices for the sake of long-term gain. Convinced that budget rules enacted through such a flawed legislative process are unlikely to work, Primo ultimately calls for a careful debate over the advantages and drawbacks of a constitutional convention initiated by the states&#8212;a radical step that would bypass Congress to create a path toward change. Rules and Restraint will be required reading for anyone interested in institutional design, legislatures, and policymaking.

Rules and Restraint: Government Spending and the Design of Institutions (American Politics and Political Economy Series)

Flying is an extremely safe way to travel. Fewer than 14,000 individuals perished in U.S. airline disasters during the twentieth century. In contrast, nearly three times as many people lose their lives in automobile accidents every year.   Yet plane crashes have a tremendous impact on public perceptions of air safety in the United States. When a crash occurs domestically, media coverage is immediate and continuous. Government teams rush to investigate, elected officials offer condolences and promise to find the cause, and airlines and plane manufacturers seek to avoid responsibility. Regulations are frequently proposed in response to a particular incident, but meaningful change often does not occur.  In The Plane Truth, Roger Cobb and David Primo examine the impact of high-visibility plane crashes on airline transportation policy. Regulation is disjointed and reactive, in part due to extensive media coverage of airline disasters. The authors describe the typical responses of various players —elected officials, investigative agencies, airlines, and the media. While all agree that safety is the primary concern in air travel, failure to agree on a definition of safety leads to policy conflicts. Looking at all airline crashes in the 1990s, the authors examine how particular features of an accident correspond to the level of media attention it receives, as well as how airline disasters affect subsequent actions by the National Transportation Safety Board, Federal Aviation Administration, and others. Three accidents are considered in detail: USAir flight 427 (September 1994), ValuJet flight 592 (May 1996), and TWA flight 800 (July 1996). The authors also discuss how the September 11 terrorist attacks turned attention away from safety and toward security. Cobb and Primo make several policy recommendations based on their findings. These include calling on lawmakers and regulators to avoid reactive regulation and instead to focus on systematic problems in airline safety, like the antiquated air traffic control system. Concerned that aviation security is eclipsing aviation safety in the wake of September 11, they encourage federal agencies to strike a better balance between the two. Finally, in order to address the FAA's poor track record in balancing airline safety regulation with its other duties, they recommend the creation of a new federal agency that is responsible for aviation safety. The Plane Truth provides a framework for understanding conflicts about the meaning of air safety and the implications of these battles for public policy.  

The Plane Truth: Airline Crashes, the Media, and Transportation Policy

In A Model Discipline, Kevin A. Clarke and David M. Primo turn a critical eye to the methodological approach that dominates modern political science. Clarke and Primo contend that the field's emphasis on model testing has led to a distortion of both the modeling process and the art of data analysis and cannot be logically justified. The authors argue that models should be seen as "objects" and thus regarded as neither true nor false. Models should instead be evaluated for their usefulness for a particular purpose. Divided into two parts, the book first establishes that current practice is not philosophy-free and rests on a number of questionable assumptions. The second part focuses on the different ways that theoretical and statistical models can be useful, and closes with a defensible justification for integrating theoretical and statistical models. A novel work of methodology, A Model Discipline offers a new perspective on long-held assumptions about the way research in the social sciences should be conducted.

A Model Discipline: Political Science and the Logic of Representations

David M. Primo is the Ani and Mark Gabrellian Professor and a professor of political science and business administration at the University of Rochester.
   
He is the author of three books, including the award-winning Rules and Restraint: Government Spending and the Design of Institutions, and numerous journal articles.  His most recent book is Campaign Finance and American Democracy: What the Public Really Thinks and Why It Matters, co-authored with Jeff Milyo. His research has been supported by several organizations, including the National Science Foundation.

Primo has published op-eds in national news outlets including the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, USA Today, and Los Angeles Times, and he’s been interviewed on radio and television stations including National Public Radio, Bloomberg, and Sirius XM.  He has testified before Congress multiple times on the subject of constitutional budget rules and budget process reform, and his campaign finance research was cited in 2011 by Chief Justice John Roberts in a US Supreme Court decision regarding the public funding of elections.

In 2014, Primo created the Politics and Markets Project, which fosters education, research, and debate about the appropriate relationship between business and government in the 21st century.  The panel events Primo moderates as part of PMP programming bring together experts from across the political spectrum to debate controversial issues in a civil fashion. 

Primo teaches courses in American politics, corporate political strategy, and innovation and global business.  He joined the Rochester faculty in 2002 after receiving his PhD in Political Science from Stanford University, where he also received an MA in Economics. He is also a senior affiliated scholar with the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

Airline Industry

Airline Business

Election Law

Federal Tax Policy

Political Gridlock

Campaign Finance

Government Spending and Budgets

Judicial Appointments

Legislative Rules

Airline Safety and Security

Corporate Political Strategy

Government shutdown

Money in Politics

Airline Operations

University of Rochester Department of Political Science

The Politics and Markets Project 

Faculty Profile: Simon Business School

Costco stayed out of politics. Then it sued Donald Trump.

How America's CEOs lost their voice — and found Trump's

Trump spoke for the 'go woke, go broke' crowd. Did Cracker Barrel listen?

Consumers are boycotting major retailers. Here's what they plan for 'blackout' on Feb. 28

Philadelphia DA Sues Elon Musk Over Voter Sweepstakes: 'Illegal Lottery'

Boeing Can Bounce Back. Here's How

After Trump assassination attempt, CEOs speak out but stay mum on election

How Donald Trump became the crypto candidate in the 2024 election

Biden's campaign war chest

Google's Gaza conflict: Why more bosses are cracking down on Israel-Hamas war protesters

Ask an Expert: The importance of civil discourse on college campuses

The Boeing Nosedive A once-venerable company turned its soul over to shareholders and courted disaster

Facing Another Boeing Crisis, the F.A.A. Takes a Harder Line

Sen. Ted Cruz steps up attacks on ‘woke’ corporations in latest book

From Hamptons fundraisers to soccer ticket raffles, GOP presidential candidates chase cash

False claim Trump increased debt more than any president | Fact check

FACT FOCUS: Who's to blame for the national debt? It's more complicated than one culprit

US Presidential Hopefuls Rally Against a Digital Dollar Ahead of 2024 Elections

Repairing Campus Dialogue

Santos campaign treasurer also worked for Zeldin, other Republicans

'Woke mind virus'? 'Corporate wokeness'? Why red America has declared war on corporate America

How Southwest’s holiday meltdown could cause long-term damage to airline’s reputation

FTX Bankruptcy Means $73 Million in Political Donations at Risk of Being Clawed Back

Airlines and airports need each other — and also hate each other

Campaign donations, spending in NY governor's race highest in 20 years

GOP wins house majority, sends a message to 'woke' businesses: get out of politics

Senate to vote on bill targeting super PACs, 'dark money' in politics

Disney, Florida and how corporations navigate competing political interests

Lt. governor indictment puts spotlight on state campaign finance reform: New York is set to launch a public financing system for political campaigns in the next election cycle

Biden Hits Road for First Fundraisers as President

The latest on Democrats' plan to tax billionaires to pay for spending bill

New Georgia campaign finance law is ‘carving a loophole’

Investigation: How campaign cash flowed to Cranley from Liberty and Elm project team

Op-ed: Reformers say HR1 will fortify our democracy. Science shows it won't

How the National Debt Affects Your Investments

CEOs spurn Trump and his allies: How big a blow?

Credit union-backed lawmakers among those contesting election

‘Zoom-bombing’ prevention and socially distanced porch parties: How the pandemic has changed political fundraising in Maryland

Op-ed: Personal Data About Small-Donor Democrats Is All Over the Internet

Why 2020 candidates seek small-dollar campaign contributions

Boeing has a New Problem

When corporations take a stance on divisive issues

One Cut Not Seen in Trump Budget: the Debt

A Concise History of Presidential Commentary on the Stock Market

TSA agent call-outs yet to hit Logan Airport

Op-ed: Markets Weren’t Spooked by a President Trump

Op-ed: Wobbly Policies Make For a Shaky Economy

Op-ed: The Stock Market Doesn’t Care About Elections

Dodd-Frank? More Like Dud-Frank for Lots of Folks

Political scientist Primo says Americans should worry about government control of social media

Op-ed: It's Not the Economy Stupid -- It's Entitlement Spending

Op-ed: New Jersey Least Corrupt? Ha, Ha

Op-Ed: Obama's Budget Blind Spot

David Primo as panelist

companies-pay-a-price-for-taking-a-stand-on-polarizing-issues

"Holding a finger to the political winds is not an effective way to run a company in a polarized world," says University of Rochester's David Primo.

Ani and Mark Gabrellian Professor, Professor of Political Science and Business Administration

News that Target’s sluggish first quarter earnings were partly due to consumers protesting the retail giant’s rollback on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies, may have some people wondering why any company would take a position on a politically divisive issue.

David Primo, a professor of political science and business administration at the University of Rochester, says political polarization across the country has forced the hands of some corporate executives to take a stand.

Perhaps not surprisingly, Americans are split on whether they want big business wading into social and political minefields.

 
“It’s pretty straight forward to think that a corporation ought to be taking positions on issues related to its core business operations,” Primo says. “The challenge for an executive, who has a fiduciary responsibility to the company, is knowing where to draw the line.”

Primo regularly shares his insights on a variety of topics with business journalists and political reporters. Recently, he spoke to USA Today about consumers boycotting major retailers. Contact him by clicking on his profile. 



Companies pay a price for taking a stand on polarizing issues

the-power-of-refusal-socially-conscious-boycotts-and-corporate-accountability

  In today's world, information travels faster than you can say "Google it!" This hyper-connectivity means companies are more exposed than ever when it comes to taking stances or actions on social issues, And  a boycott can be a force to reckon with.  With social media as their megaphone, these retail boycott campaigns can quickly capture global attention, asking consumers  not to spend money in stores or online for a day or even an extended period of time. It's an increasingly common dilemma for corporations and their bottom line. 

 Says David Primo, professor of political science and business administration at the University of Rochester: “Companies need to figure out what they will take positions on, what they won’t take positions on, and then stand firm. Holding your finger to the political winds is not an effective way to run a company in a polarized world.”



```


The Power of Refusal: Socially Conscious Boycotts and Corporate Accountability

repairing-boeings-relationship-with-the-faa

  The Boeing Corporation is the recognized pioneer in aviation and aircraft manufacturing, but  significant quality control  concerns have mounted in light of near disasters associated with Boeing's planes, including notably the Alaska Airlines door flying off in January.

David Primo, professor of political science and business administration at the University of Rochester, is available to tackle some of the regulatory, crisis management and reputational questions related to Boeing's safety and production problems, including regaining the trust of the Federal Aviation Administration:

“The challenge Boeing faces is how do they rebuild safety, rebuild the relationship with the FAA, but keep the business going? And that’s a very tough balancing act. The FAA is going to give Boeing much less in the way of the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the design of planes, which could very much constrain its production system. So it’s going to mean that planes might take a little longer to get off the production line and into the hands of airlines."


Repairing Boeing's relationship with the FAA

David Primo, an expert in campaign finance laws, discusses the Supreme Courts decision to allow corporate and union spending around elections. Primo cautions that although the ruling gives companies new freedom to spend freely in the political process, it is unlikely that corporate money will drown out the voices of citizens.

Help us caption & translate this video!

http://amara.org/v/CHBy/

David Primo: Campaign Finance

Select Inquiry Type