Bild 1 von 1
Galerie
Bild 1 von 1
Ähnlichen Artikel verkaufen?
Der Anschein von Korruption: Testen der Annahmen des Obersten Gerichtshofs über Cam
US $50,47
Ca.CHF 40,36
Artikelzustand:
Neu
Neues, ungelesenes, ungebrauchtes Buch in makellosem Zustand ohne fehlende oder beschädigte Seiten. Genauere Einzelheiten entnehmen Sie bitte dem Angebot des Verkäufers.
4 verfügbar1 verkauft
- Sofort-KaufenDer Anschein von Korruption: Testen der Annahmen des Obersten Gerichtshofs über Cam
Oops! Looks like we're having trouble connecting to our server.
Refresh your browser window to try again.
Versand:
Kostenlos USPS Media MailTM.
Standort: Columbia, Missouri, USA
Lieferung:
Lieferung zwischen Fr, 17. Okt und Di, 21. Okt nach 94104 bei heutigem Zahlungseingang
Rücknahme:
30 Tage Rückgabe. Käufer zahlt Rückversand. Wenn Sie ein eBay-Versandetikett verwenden, werden die Kosten dafür von Ihrer Rückerstattung abgezogen.
Zahlungen:
Sicher einkaufen
Der Verkäufer ist für dieses Angebot verantwortlich.
eBay-Artikelnr.:236263458634
Artikelmerkmale
- Artikelzustand
- Book Title
- The Appearance of Corruption: Testing the Supreme Court's Assumpt
- ISBN
- 9780197548417
Über dieses Produkt
Product Identifiers
Publisher
Oxford University Press, Incorporated
ISBN-10
0197548415
ISBN-13
9780197548417
eBay Product ID (ePID)
6050034582
Product Key Features
Number of Pages
200 Pages
Publication Name
Appearance of Corruption : Testing the Supreme Court's Assumptions about Campaign Finance Reform
Language
English
Subject
Constitutional, General, Comparative Politics
Publication Year
2021
Type
Textbook
Subject Area
Law, Political Science
Format
Hardcover
Dimensions
Item Height
0.8 in
Item Weight
16 Oz
Item Length
6.1 in
Item Width
9.3 in
Additional Product Features
Intended Audience
Scholarly & Professional
LCCN
2020-028510
Reviews
"This masterful treatise is a highly engaging and lucid analysis of Supreme Court jurisprudence on money in politics. Shaw, Roberts and Baek are first-rate scholars and communicators. They pinpoint key assertions about political behavior underlying Court opinions, then put these claims to the test in a series of empirical chapters. This logical and even-handed approach is a refreshing reprieve from the usual demagoguery that dominates the policy debate over campaign financing. The result is a compelling civics lesson not just for students of American government, but for any citizen concerned about the influence of money in politics." -- Jeff Milyo, Chairman and Professor of Economics, Economics, University of Missouri "The Supreme Court, through decisions like Citizens United, have had the most powerful impact on the design of campaign finance laws. This books questions whether they have been flying blind with their assumptions about perceived corruption and its impact on American's trust and participation. The book should have a significant impact on how we think about campaign finance reform and hopefully spur some innovative thinking. It is must read for policymakers scholars, students and the engaged public." -- Raymond La Raja, Professor of Political Science, University of Massachusetts Amherst, This masterful treatise is a highly engaging and lucid analysis of Supreme Court jurisprudence on money in politics. Shaw, Roberts and Baek are first-rate scholars and communicators. They pinpoint key assertions about political behavior underlying Court opinions, then put these claims to the test in a series of empirical chapters. This logical and even-handed approach is a refreshing reprieve from the usual demagoguery that dominates the policy debate over campaignfinancing. The result is a compelling civics lesson not just for students of American government, but for any citizen concerned about the influence of money in politics., "This masterful treatise is a highly engaging and lucid analysis of Supreme Court jurisprudence on money in politics. Shaw, Roberts and Baek are first-rate scholars and communicators. They pinpoint key assertions about political behavior underlying Court opinions, then put these claims to the test in a series of empirical chapters. This logical and even-handed approach is a refreshing reprieve from the usual demagoguery that dominates the policy debate over campaign financing. The result is a compelling civics lesson not just for students of American government, but for any citizen concerned about the influence of money in politics." -- Jeff Milyo, Chairman and Professor of Economics, Economics, University of Missouri"The Supreme Court, through decisions like Citizens United, have had the most powerful impact on the design of campaign finance laws. This books questions whether they have been flying blind with their assumptions about perceived corruption and its impact on American's trust and participation. The book should have a significant impact on how we think about campaign finance reform and hopefully spur some innovative thinking. It is must read for policymakers scholars, students and the engaged public." -- Raymond La Raja, Professor of Political Science, University of Massachusetts Amherst, "This masterful treatise is a highly engaging and lucid analysis of Supreme Court jurisprudence on money in politics. Shaw, Roberts and Baek are first-rate scholars and communicators. They pinpoint key assertions about political behavior underlying Court opinions, then put these claims to the test in a series of empirical chapters. This logical and even-handed approach is a refreshing reprieve from the usual demagoguery that dominates the policy debate overcampaign financing. The result is a compelling civics lesson not just for students of American government, but for any citizen concerned about the influence of money in politics." -- Jeff Milyo, Chairmanand Professor of Economics, Economics, University of Missouri"The Supreme Court, through decisions like Citizens United, have had the most powerful impact on the design of campaign finance laws. This books questions whether they have been flying blind with their assumptions about perceived corruption and its impact on American's trust and participation. The book should have a significant impact on how we think about campaign finance reform and hopefully spur some innovative thinking. It is must read for policymakersscholars, students and the engaged public." -- Raymond La Raja, Professor of Political Science, University of Massachusetts Amherst
Dewey Edition
23
TitleLeading
The
Illustrated
Yes
Dewey Decimal
342.73/078
Table Of Content
Acknowledgments Preface Chapter 1: The Appearance of Corruption: An Introduction Chapter 2: What Do Americans Know about Campaign Finance? Chapter 3: Gauging (Perceived) Corruption Chapter 4: Perceived Corruption and Trust in Government Chapter 5: Perceived Corruption and Political Participation Chapter 6: Campaign Contributions and Partisan Vote Choice Chapter 7: Campaign Finance Reform and the Court in a Post-Citizens United World? References
Synopsis
A critical analysis of the connections that the United States Supreme Court has made between campaign finance regulations and voters' behavior. The sanctity of political speech is a key element of the United States Constitution and a cornerstone of the American republic. When the Supreme Court linked political speech to campaign finance in its landmark Buckley v. Valeo (1976) decision, the modern era of campaign finance regulation was born. The decision stated that in order to pass constitutional muster, any laws limiting money in politics must be narrowly tailored and serve a compelling state interest. The lone state interest the Court was willing to entertain was the mitigation of corruption. In order to reach this conclusion, the Court advanced a sophisticated behavioral model that made assumptions about how laws affect voters' opinions and behavior. These assumptions have received surprisingly little attention until now. In The Appearance of Corruption , Daron Shaw, Brian Roberts, and Mijeong Baek analyze the connections that the Court made between campaign finance regulations and voters' behavior. The court argued that an increase in perceived corruption would lower engagement and turnout. Drawing from original survey data and experiments, they confront the question of what happens when the Supreme Court is wrong-and when the foundation of over 40 years of jurisprudence is simply not true. Even with the heightened awareness of campaign finance issues that emerged in the wake of the 2010 Citizens United decision, there is little empirical support for the Court's reasoning that turnout would decline. A rigorous statistical analysis, this is the first work to simultaneously name and test each and every one of the Court's assumptions in the pre- and post-Citizen's United eras. It will also fundamentally reshape how we think about campaign finance regulation's effects on voter behavior., A critical analysis of the connections that the United States Supreme Court has made between campaign finance regulations and voters' behavior. The sanctity of political speech is a key element of the United States Constitution and a cornerstone of the American republic. When the Supreme Court linked political speech to campaign finance in its landmark Buckley v. Valeo (1976) decision, the modern era of campaign finance regulation was born. The decision stated that in order to pass constitutional muster, any laws limiting money in politics must be narrowly tailored and serve a compelling state interest. The lone state interest the Court was willing to entertain was the mitigation of corruption. In order to reach this conclusion, the Court advanced a sophisticated behavioral model that made assumptions about how laws affect voters' opinions and behavior. These assumptions have received surprisingly little attention until now. In The Appearance of Corruption, Daron Shaw, Brian Roberts, and Mijeong Baek analyze the connections that the Court made between campaign finance regulations and voters' behavior. The court argued that an increase in perceived corruption would lower engagement and turnout. Drawing from original survey data and experiments, they confront the question of what happens when the Supreme Court is wrong-and when the foundation of over 40 years of jurisprudence is simply not true. Even with the heightened awareness of campaign finance issues that emerged in the wake of the 2010 Citizens United decision, there is little empirical support for the Court's reasoning that turnout would decline. A rigorous statistical analysis, this is the first work to simultaneously name and test each and every one of the Court's assumptions in the pre- and post-Citizen's United eras. It will also fundamentally reshape how we think about campaign finance regulation's effects on voter behavior., In Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the US Supreme Court famously upheld the constitutionality of legislation limiting individual campaign contributions in federal elections. Key to the Court's decision is the notion that the government has a compelling interest in reducing "the appearance of corruption." By reducing the public's belief that elected officials are corrupt, the Court argues, we will see increased trust in government and, thereby, increased political participation. This behavioral model is unique in Supreme Court jurisprudence, yet has never been subjected to systematic empirical verification. This book identifies and tests the model with several national surveys. The data refute many of the linkages assumed by the Court, raising questions about the legal foundation for limiting political speech in federal election campaigns., A critical analysis of the connections that the United States Supreme Court has made between campaign finance regulations and voters' behavior.The sanctity of political speech is a key element of the United States Constitution and a cornerstone of the American republic. When the Supreme Court linked political speech to campaign finance in its landmark Buckley v. Valeo (1976) decision, the modern era of campaign finance regulation was born. The decision stated that in order to pass constitutional muster, any laws limiting money in politics must be narrowly tailored and serve a compelling state interest. The lone state interest the Court was willing to entertain was the mitigation of corruption. In order to reach this conclusion, the Court advanced a sophisticated behavioral model that made assumptions about how laws affect voters' opinions and behavior. These assumptions have received surprisingly little attention until now. In The Appearance of Corruption, Daron Shaw, Brian Roberts, and Mijeong Baek analyze the connections that the Court made between campaign finance regulations and voters' behavior. The court argued that an increase in perceived corruption would lower engagement and turnout. Drawing from original survey data and experiments, they confront the question of what happens when the Supreme Court is wrong-and when the foundation of over 40 years of jurisprudence is simply not true. Even with the heightened awareness of campaign finance issues that emerged in the wake of the 2010 Citizens United decision, there is little empirical support for the Court's reasoning that turnout would decline. A rigorous statistical analysis, this is the first work to simultaneously name and test each and every one of the Court's assumptions in the pre- and post-Citizen's United eras. It will also fundamentally reshape how we think about campaign finance regulation's effects on voter behavior.
LC Classification Number
KF4920.S53 2021
Artikelbeschreibung des Verkäufers
Info zu diesem Verkäufer
textbooks_source
99,5% positive Bewertungen•255 Tsd. Artikel verkauft
Angemeldet als gewerblicher Verkäufer
Verkäuferbewertungen (42'966)
Dieser Artikel (1)
Alle Artikel (42'966)
- Automatische Bewertung von eBay- Bewertung vom Käufer.Letzter MonatBestellung pünktlich und problemlos geliefert
- l***m (608)- Bewertung vom Käufer.Letzter MonatBestätigter KaufThank you seller. Very happy.
- eBay automated Feedback- Bewertung vom Käufer.Letzter MonatOrder delivered on time with no issues
- eBay automated Feedback- Bewertung vom Käufer.Letzter MonatOrder delivered on time with no issues
textbooks_source
99,5% positive Bewertungen•255 Tsd. Artikel verkauft
Angemeldet als gewerblicher Verkäufer
Verkäuferbewertungen (42'966)
Dieser Artikel (1)
Alle Artikel (42'966)
- Automatische Bewertung von eBay- Bewertung vom Käufer.Letzter MonatBestellung pünktlich und problemlos geliefert
- l***m (608)- Bewertung vom Käufer.Letzter MonatBestätigter KaufThank you seller. Very happy.
- eBay automated Feedback- Bewertung vom Käufer.Letzter MonatOrder delivered on time with no issues
- eBay automated Feedback- Bewertung vom Käufer.Letzter MonatOrder delivered on time with no issues