David B. Magleby – författare

Few events in American politics over the past two decades have generated more attention than the increasing number of voters calling themselves Independent. By the early 1970s Independents outnumbered Republicans, according to many eminent experts on voting behavior. Yet the authors of this incisive new commentary on American politics claim that most of this widespread speculation on declining party affiliation is simply wrong. They contend that most so-called Independents lean strongly toward one of the two parties and resemble - in all important respects - either Democrats or Republicans. Contrary to expert opinion, only a small segment of voters are truly 'independent' of either major party. Based on the most up-to-date 1990 data, "The Myth of the Independent Voter" provides a road map of the political arena for the general reader and scholar alike. Debunking conventional wisdom about voting patterns and allaying recent concerns about electoral stability and possible third party movements, the authors uncover faulty polling practices that have resulted in a skewed sense of the American voting population.Demonstrating that most of what has been written about Independents for more than thirty years is myth, this challenging book offers a trenchant new understanding of the party system, voting behavior, and public opinion.

Political parties, interest groups, and candidate campaigns all pursue similar goals in presidential elections: each entity attempts to mobilize voters. However, the regulatory environment often prevents these groups from coordinating their efforts. With participants playing by new rules mandated by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, the 2004 presidential election included previously unseen configurations and alliances between political actors. In some campaign situations, the resulting "dance" was carefully choreographed. In others, dancers stepped on each other's toes. In still others, participants could only eye each other across the floor.Dancing without Partners intensively analyzes the relationships among candidates, political parties, and interest groups under the BCRA's new regulations in the 2004 election cycle in five battleground states. The chapters assess the ways in which the rules of the game have changed the game itself—and also how they haven't. The result is a book that will be invaluable to researchers and students of presidential elections.

Political parties, interest groups, and candidate campaigns all pursue similar goals in presidential elections: each entity attempts to mobilize voters. However, the regulatory environment often prevents these groups from coordinating their efforts. With participants playing by new rules mandated by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, the 2004 presidential election included previously unseen configurations and alliances between political actors. In some campaign situations, the resulting "dance" was carefully choreographed. In others, dancers stepped on each other's toes. In still others, participants could only eye each other across the floor.Dancing without Partners intensively analyzes the relationships among candidates, political parties, and interest groups under the BCRA's new regulations in the 2004 election cycle in five battleground states. The chapters assess the ways in which the rules of the game have changed the game itself—and also how they haven't. The result is a book that will be invaluable to researchers and students of presidential elections.

The 2008 elections were by any standard historic. The nation elected its first African American president, and the Republicans nominated their first female candidate for vice president. More money was raised and spent on federal contests than in any election in U.S. history. Barack Obama raised a record-setting $745 million for his campaign and federal candidates, party committees, and interest groups also raised and spent record-setting amounts. Moreover, the way money was raised by some candidates and party committees has the potential to transform American politics for years to come.The latest installment in a series that dates back half a century, Financing the 2008 Election is the definitive analysis of how campaign finance and spending shaped the historic presidential and congressional races of 2008. It explains why these records were set and what it means for the future of U.S. politics. David Magleby and Anthony Corrado have assembled a team of experts who join them in exploring the financing of the 2008 presidential and congressional elections. They provide insights into the political parties and interest groups that made campaign finance history and summarize important legal and regulatory changes that affected these elections.Contributors: Allan Cigler (University of Kansas), Stephanie Perry Curtis (Brigham Young University), John C. Green (Bliss Institute at the University of Akron), Paul S. Herrnson (University of Maryland), Diana Kingsbury (Bliss Institute at the University of Akron), Thomas E. Mann (Brookings Institution).

Since the 1960 national election, the nonpartisan Citizens¡¯ Research Foundation (CRF) has published a series of Financing the Election volumes, compiling reliable data on the costs and trends of campaign finance. For the 2000 edition, CRF and the Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy at Brigham Young University assembled leading political science scholars to analyze this historic election season where campaign finance was critically important. Candice J. Nelson of American University compares spending estimates in 2000 with previous election cycles, and discusses the implications of increased spending. John C. Green and Nathan S. Bigelow of the Roy Bliss Institute at the University of Akron look at the presidential nomination campaigns, while Anthony Corrado of Colby College explores the financing of the general election, including the unprecedented Florida recount battle. Paul S. Herrnson of the University of Maryland and Kelly D. Patterson of Brigham Young University review the close party balance in the House and Senate and its effect on the financing of congressional elections. Diana Dwyre of California State University-Chico and Robin Kolodny of Temple University put the role of political parties and their use of soft money in perspective. Alan J. Cigler of the University of Kansas investigates the ways interest groups attempt to influence elections. Anthony Gierzynski of the University of Vermont analyzes the impact of redistricting on gubernatorial and state legislative elections, while Roy A. Schotland of Georgetown University Law School examines the recent history and rising costs of judicial campaigns. Finally, Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution discusses lessons the 2000 elections should teach us about the realities of financing elections and the implications for reform that emerged from this remarkable election. In setting forth the contours of American political finance, Financing the 2000 Election provides a unique reso

Money and politics in an election that broke the moldBeginning with the 1960 election, readers could turn to one book for an authoritative and comprehensive examination of campaign finance at the federal level. Now, the latest in this respected series, Financing the 2016 Election, explores the role of money in one of the most unconventional elections in modern American history. A team of leading scholars has dug into the roles played by political parties and special interest groups (including their “Super PACS”) in the presidential and congressional elections of 2016.David Magleby and his team of experts examined Federal Elections Commission reports and interviewed dozens of key participants, including representatives of virtually all the major interest groups active in the 2016 election cycle. They place that election in the context of how U.S. elections have been financed during recent decades—a context that illustrates how dramatically different campaign finance is today from the past. Among the most important changes has been the growth of so-called Super PACS, which have become increasingly important both in the financing they provide candidates and in their ability to act independently, both for and against candidates. Overall, Super PACS doubled their spending in 2016 from four years earlier.Taking a comprehensive approach, this book helps readers understand how the financing of elections—including the increasing reliance by candidates on outside special interest groups—ultimately affects politics and public policy.

The amount of money needed to run a competitive congressional campaign is staggering, with special interests playing a central role in raising these funds. Also of concern is the declining competitiveness of House elections. And while recognition of the need to reform campaign financing is widespread, partisan and House/Senate differences over what these changes should be have complicated legislative efforts.Almost $450 million was spent in both the 1986 and 1988 congressional campaigns, much of it coming from wealthy contributors and political action committees (PACs). Increasing criticism of the current system will undoubtedly force Congress to keep campaign finance reform on it's legislative agenda.Using public opinion, election and campaign spending data, extensive interviews, and a knowledge of practical politics, Magleby and Nelson examine the central issues in the campaign financing debate: the cost of congressional campaigns, financial participation by the political parties and PACs, existing and proposed limits on contributions and expenditures, public financing, and the role of the Federal Election Commission. They propose a comprehensive package of reforms that will undoubtedly serve as a guide for future legislation.

The 2002 midterm elections were noteworthy U.S. congressional campaigns for many reasons. They marked the last national contests before implementation of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) and thus were expected by many to be the ""last hurrah"" for soft money. These midterm campaigns provided a window on the activity of parties, interest groups, and political consultants on the eve of BCRA, as they prepared to enter a new era of American elections. The results of Campaign 2002 were remarkable. As the party in power, the Republicans defied history by gaining seats in both houses of Congress, giving them a majority in the Senate. To some degree this resulted from the GOP's new emphasis on ""ground war"" voter mobilization. Another key was the unusually aggressive support of the sitting president, who leveraged his popularity to advance his party's candidates for Congress. Th e Last Hurrah? analyzes the role of soft money and issue advocacy in the 2002 battle for Congress. Having been granted access to a number of campaign operations across a broad array of groups, David Magleby, Quin Monson, and their colleagues monitored and documented a number of competitive races, including the key South Dakota and Missouri Senate contests. Each case study breaks down the campaign communication in a particular race, including devices such as advertising, get-out-the-vote drives, ""soft money"" expenditures, and the increasingly influential role of the national parties on local races. They also discuss the overall trends of the midterm election of 2002, paying particular attention to the impact of President Bush and his political operation in candidate recruitment, fundraising, and campaign visits. Magleby and Monson consider an important question typically overlooked. How do voters caught in the middle of a hotly contested race deal with—and react to—a barrage of television and radio ads, direct mail, unsolicited phone calls, and other campaign communications? T

In the wake of recent legislation, court challenges, and demands for reform, campaign finance remains one of the most important and controversial aspects of the world's oldest democracy. Since 1960, Financing the Election volumes have presented reliable information on the costs and trends of campaign finance in the United States. In establishing the parameters of electoral campaigns and political spending—and interpreting the results—Financing the 2004 Election provides a unique resource for readers and citizens interested in the current state of politics and money in America. F inancing the 2004 Election incorporates many of the features that have made previous editions so important. It employs authoritative analysis of spending by interest groups, political parties, and individual candidates, including data that enables examination of long-term trends. The contributors, all eminent political analysts, also examine spending patterns in different types of elections, including Senate and House races. This timely new volume pays special attention to the effects of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA). It contrasts campaign finance in 2004 with the ways in which national campaigns were financed before BCRA. The authors also draws lessons from 2004 for future reforms at the state and federal levels.

While much is known about who votes in American elections, much less is known about who donates. In this book, the authors utilize a unique and historically unprecedented data set of donors from the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections to answer longstanding questions: what is the relationship between donors and candidates? How do candidates attract and respond to contributors? How do campaign strategies reflect changing campaign finance laws and the development of the internet? With unprecedented cooperation from the Obama, McCain, and Romney campaigns, the authors investigate presidential campaign donors at all giving levels to produce the most systematic and complete analysis of donors to presidential nominees to date. As elections are decided increasingly by donors' dollars, Who Donates to Campaigns? provides relevant research on the broader trends in partisan polarization and, more generally, on how campaigns can engage more citizens in political participation.

While much is known about who votes in American elections, much less is known about who donates. In this book, the authors utilize a unique and historically unprecedented data set of donors from the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections to answer longstanding questions: what is the relationship between donors and candidates? How do candidates attract and respond to contributors? How do campaign strategies reflect changing campaign finance laws and the development of the internet? With unprecedented cooperation from the Obama, McCain, and Romney campaigns, the authors investigate presidential campaign donors at all giving levels to produce the most systematic and complete analysis of donors to presidential nominees to date. As elections are decided increasingly by donors' dollars, Who Donates to Campaigns? provides relevant research on the broader trends in partisan polarization and, more generally, on how campaigns can engage more citizens in political participation.

Just in time for the coming election year, this book looks at the changing of the guard in 2006 and speculates on where the system may be heading in 2008. It provides an in-depth examination of the ways in which candidates, interest groups, and parties perceived their opportunities and allocated their campaign resources during the midterm elections. The role of money, which was influenced by campaign finance reform, is a special focus in this book. The theme of political scandal has frequently raised concerns that Republican leadership had become a "culture of corruption" that had flourished under their watch, which is also addressed in this book. The war in Iraq, however, may be the most important factor-not only in the 2006 battle for Congress, but for the 2008 battle for the White House as well.