American Politics Today - Essentials (3rd Ed)

(vip2019) #1

A42 ENDNOTES



  1. For 2006 exit poll data, see Pew Research Center, “Public Cheers
    Democratic Victory,” November 16, 2006, http://people-press
    .org/reports/display .php3?ReportID=296 (accessed 10/19/12).

  2. For data on presidential approval and evaluations of Con-
    gress in normal and nationalized elections, see Pew Research
    Center, “Democrats Hold Double-Digit Lead in Competitive
    Districts,” October 6, 2006, http://people-press .org/reports/
    display.php3?ReportID=293 (accessed 10/19/12).

  3. Pew Research Center, “Midterm Snapshot: Enthusiasm for
    Obama Reelection Bid Greater Than for Reagan in 1982,”
    October 25, 2010, http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1778/public
    -split-on-obama-run-in-2012-but -better-than-reagan-outlook
    -in-1982?src=prc-latest&proj=forum (accessed 10/19/12).

  4. Amanda Terkel, “The One-Person Funded Super-PAC: How
    Wealthy Donors Can Skirt Campaign Finance Restrictions,”
    Huffi ngton Post, October 22, 2010, http://www.huffi ngtonpost.com/
    2010/10/21/super-pac-taxpayers- earmarks-concerned-citizens
    -campaign-fi nance_n_772214.html (accessed 10/19/12).

  5. Amy Gardner, “Gauging the Scope of the Tea Party Movement
    in America,” Washington Post, October 24, 2010, p. A1.


CHAPTER 8


  1. Capital Eye Blog, “TARP Recipients Paid Out $114 Million for
    Politicking Last Year,” February 4, 2009, http://www.opensecrets
    .org/news/2009/02/tarp-recipients-paid-out-114-m.html
    (accessed 9/18/12).

  2. see also Joe Weisenthal, “Congressmen: Yep, Wall Street
    Owns Washington,” June 4, 2009, http://www.businessinsider.com/
    congressman-yep-wall-street-owns-washington-2009-6
    (accessed 8/28/09).

  3. Robert H. Salisbury, John P. Heinz, Edward O. Laumann, and
    Robert L. Nelson, “Who Works with Whom? Interest Group
    Alliances and Opposition,” American Political Science Review
    81 (1987): 1217–34.

  4. Business-Industry Political Action Committee, “About
    BIPAC,” http://www.bipac.org/about/about.asp (accessed 4/8/08).

  5. James Q. Wilson, Political Organizations (New York: Basic
    Books, 1974).

  6. American Automobile Association, Foundation for Traffi c
    Safety, http://www.aaafoundation.org/home (accessed 4/8/08).

  7. Scott Ainsworth, “Regulating Lobbyists and Interest Group
    Infl uence,” Journal of Politics 55 (1993): 41–55.

  8. Scott Ainsworth, Analyzing Interest Groups: Group Infl uence
    on People and Policies (New York: Norton, 2002)

  9. Timothy Egan, “For Thirsty Farmers, Old Friends at Interior,”
    New York Times, March 3, 2006, p. A1.

  10. Public Citizen Congress Watch, “Congressional Revolving
    Doors: The Journey from Congress to K Street,” July 2005,
    http://www.lobbyinginfo.org/documents/RevolveDoor.pdf (accessed
    4/9/08).

  11. Eric Lipton, “Former Antiterror Offi cials Find Industry Pays
    Better,” New York Times, June 18, 2006, p. A1.

  12. Lobbying regulations are often changed; the discussion here
    is just a general guide. Regular reports on past, current, and

  13. Jonathan Krasno and Frank J. Sorauf, “For the Defense,” Polit-
    ical Science and Politics 37 (2004): 777–80.

  14. Brian Stelter, “The Price of 30 Seconds,” New York Times, Octo-
    ber 1, 2007, http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/
    10/01/the-price-of-30-seconds (accessed 10/19/12).

  15. For a review of this literature, see Michael Malbin, The Elec-
    tion after Reform: Money, Politics, and the Bipartisan Cam-
    paign Reform Act (Washington, DC: Roman & Littlefi eld,
    2006).

  16. For a discussion, see Patterson, The Vanishing Voter, espe-
    cially Chapter 1, “The Incredible Shrinking Electorate,”
    pp. 3–22.

  17. William H. Riker and Peter Ordeshook, “A Theory of the Cal-
    culus of Voting,” American Political Science Review 62 (1968):
    25–39.

  18. Michael McDonald, “The United States Elections Project,”
    http://elections .gmu.edu (accessed 10/19/12).

  19. Pew Research Center, “Regular Voters, Intermittent Voters,
    and Those Who Don’t,” October 18, 2006, http://www.people-press
    .org/reports/pdf/292.pdf.

  20. Richard P. Lau and David P. Reslawsk, How Voters Decide:
    Information Processing during Electoral Campaigns (New
    York: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

  21. Gary Cox and Jonathan Katz, “Why Did the Incumbency
    Advantage in U.S. House Elections Grow?” American Journal
    of Political Science 40 (1996): 478–96.

  22. Charles Franklin, “Eschewing Obfuscation: Campaigns and
    the Perceptions of U.S. Senate Incumbents,” American Politi-
    cal Science Review 85 (December, 1991): 1193–214; Wendy
    M. Rahn, “The Role of Partisan Stereotypes in Information
    Processing about Political Candidates,” American Journal of
    Political Science 37 (May 1993): 472–96.

  23. Bruce Cain, John Ferejohn, and Morris Fiorina, The Personal
    Vote (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985).

  24. Jeff rey Koch, “Gender Stereotypes and Citizens’ Impres-
    sions of House Candidates’ Ideological Orientations,” Ameri-
    can Journal of Political Science 46 (2002): 453–62; Monica
    McDermott, “Candidate Occupations and Voter Information,”
    Journal of Politics 67 (2005): 201–18; Carol Sigelman, Lee
    Sigelman, Barbara Walkosz, and Michael Nitz, “Black Candi-
    dates, White Voters: Understanding Racial Bias in Political
    Perceptions,” American Journal of Political Science 39 (Febru-
    ary 1995): 243–65.

  25. Fiorina, Retrospective Voting in American National Elections;
    Key, The Responsible Electorate.

  26. Alfred J. Tuchfarber, Stephen E. Bennett, Andrew E. Smith,
    and Eric W. Rademacher, “The Republican Tidal Wave of
    1994: Testing Hypotheses about Realignment, Restructur-
    ing, and Rebellion,” Political Science and Politics 28 (1995):
    689–93.

  27. Samuel Popkin, The Reasoning Voter (Chicago: University of
    Chicago Press, 1991).

  28. Richard R. Lau and David P. Redlawsk, “Advantages and Dis-
    advantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Mak-
    ing,” American Journal of Political Science 45 (2001): 951–71.

Free download pdf