A Theme of Equality in Campaigns and Elections

A Theme of Equality in Campaigns and ElectionsAuthor(s): Marion JustSource: PS: Political Science and Politics, Vol. 38, No. 1 (Jan., 2005), pp. 57-65Published by: American Political Science AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30044227 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 20:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toPS: Political Science and Politics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 20:27:41 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=apsa

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30044227?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


THE TEACHER

A Theme of Equality in Campaigns and Elections

Marion Just, Wellesley College

Elections are the chief mechanisms of popular consent and political ac-

countability in democracy. As recent history attests: "elections in the democratic context can have significant impli- cations for the makeup of a nation's ruling circle and the character of its policies" (Ginsberg 1982, viii). While American elections are undeniably con- sequential, they fail on the democratic standard of equality. The American electorate is class biased-and more so than in other advanced democracies. Re- search for more than 50 years has shown that large numbers of Americans don't vote and that voters and non- voters are drawn from different income and educational strata (Leighley and Na- gler 1992). The burning issue of Ameri- can elections is how to make the electorate more representative of the population as a whole. Courses on American elections, however, devote lit- tle time to turn-out and still less on how to mobilize non-voters. Instead, the lion's share of the typical syllabus is de- voted to the presidential campaign process. The emphasis on "hoopla" (Pat- terson 1980) cannot help but feed student conceptualization of politics as a game, rather than an essential social enterprise. If our goal as teachers of political science is to bring students into the world of constructive democratic citizenship, then we must discuss with our students what is at stake in American elections.

Conveying the meaning of elections is essential both to promote the civic education of our students and to understand better the abstention of non-voters. Political scientists know, for example, that minority voting increases when one (but not all) of the candidates is a member of the minority group. Overall turnout increases in the face of eco-

Marion Just is professor of political science at Wellesley College and an associate of the Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy at the John

F. Kennedy School of

Government, Harvard University. She is a co- auther of Crosstalk: Citizens, Candidates and the Media in a Presidential Campaign (Univer- sity of Chicago Press, 1996).

nomic hard times (as in 1992) or the combination of economic problems and war (as in 2004). Clearly people will turn out to vote if they believe there are important issues at stake. The 2004 election showed, however, that even if turnout increases, the demographic makeup of the electorate may not change. It seems that aside from other obstacles to voting, some non-voters were unmoved by the issues (Vanishing Voter, 2004). E. E. Schattschneider pointed out that voluntary abstention follows a circular logic. People do not participate because the issues that excite the electorate do not move them. But non-voters can only change the electoral agenda if they become voters ([1960] 1975, ch. 6).

There are both good political science and civic reasons to consider why the electorate ought to be representative and why other democracies experience broader electoral participation than the U.S. A survey of courses on campaigns and elections reveals that many fail to address issues of voter mobilization and the consequences of elections. Review of syllabi in the field shows, however, that there are some strategies for suc- cessfully incorporating issues of democratic representation and mobilization without overstraining course content. The particular approaches include cast- ing courses in a comparative or reform context, examining elections at the local and state level, and emphasizing the critical role of political parties in the flow of issues and public policy. If instructors choose to address the problem of non-voting, the distortion of the electorate, and its impact on government policy, they will get the added benefit of conveying to their students the seri- ousness of the democratic enterprise.

The $64 Question Schattschneider remarked, "Anyone

who finds out how to involve the forty million [non-voters] in American politics will run the country for a generation" (101). Schattschneider was convinced that non-voters would only enter the system if the discourse addressed new

and different issues involving the concerns of non-voters. Schattschneider's analysis of the causes of non-voting was more nuanced than much current research, and was particularly astute about the psychological pressures on the under-represented. He argued that:

stratification and isolation and segrega- tion are to a great extent the uncon- scious or semiconscious by-products of the way the social system operates to organize the community. It is not necessary to speak one unkind or ungra- cious word to keep a poor man out of a rich man's church or college or club or hotel. (106)

At the same time, Schattschneider was dismissive of mass media efforts to get out the vote and of the efficacy of removing legal barriers to the ballot box (ch. 6). In the 40-odd years since Schattschneider wrote about non-voting, political scientists have generally not shared his psychological emphasis.

Instead, a great deal of scholarly attention has been given to the removal of institutional obstacles to voting in the U.S., especially by facilitating registra- tion, establishing Election Day holidays, and increasing voter convenience. A recent study by Frances Piven and Richard Cloward (2000) puts a great deal of faith in the leverage of the Mo- tor Voter Act. Studies of electoral reform show, however, that measures such as Motor Voter, mail balloting, and other easements of the voting process do not change the demography of voting (Traugott, in Crigler et al. 2003, 181-182). Changes in the rules can increase the number of usual voters who participate in a given election; but making the ballot box more accessible will not change the make-up of the electorate in terms of class or ethnicity. Of course, simply expanding the size of the electorate is a perfectly worthy goal, as a large majority of participants enhances the apparent legitimacy of democratic elections. But the class bias of the current system goes to the heart of the principle of equality that is essential to the democratic process.

PSOnline www.apsanet.org 57



Not long ago, analysts believed that, even if the preferences of non-voters were added to those of voters, the outcome of American elections would not change (Abramson, Aldrich, and Rohde 2000). Beginning with the 1994 off-year election, in which the Republican Party obtained a majority of seats in the House of Representatives, the comfort- ing notion that universal participation would not change election outcomes had to be discarded. Non-voters are both de- mographically and preferentially different from voters, and if they did vote, elections would have different outcomes.

Without higher levels of participation by disadvantaged groups, the system will continue to derogate and ignore their needs. The fate of non-participants is dependent on battles between those who do not wish to meet their needs and the largesse of well-intentioned others. The outcome is inevitably and dis- appointingly off the mark. A look at policy outcomes in the area of welfare "reform" or healthcare show just how much the policy debate can detour around the needs and preferences of Americans who do not participate in the political process.

Political scientists have identified the characteristics associated with participation, but not how to motivate participation. Studies by sociologists have shown that people's concerns form a circum- plex from the personal and family to the neighborhood and then on to the nation (Levy and Guttman 1975). Family health, safety, and economic welfare are the inner tier of concern. For many American families, the circumstances in those life areas are so marginal that they find it impossible to proceed be- yond that intimate circle to the more distant social and political world. Fur- ther research is needed to unlock the mystery of the mobilization of under- represented groups. We have to understand how politics fits into the lives of ordinary people. It is a necessary step in conveying the consequences of elections to non-college young people, new immigrants, members of minority groups, and the poor.'1

Convincing people who are not in- volved in the political process that there is a real pay-off from participation is not a simple matter. As Anthony Downs (1957) argued, the democratic paradox is that the information costs of voting and the imperceptible impact of any single vote do not warrant participation by rational actors. As Downs claimed and others have demonstrated, information costs are greater for those with fewer resources of education or social standing. The more people need infor-

mation, the more costly the information and the less likely they are to get it. As Pippa Norris argues, political knowledge is a "virtuous circle; people with higher cognitive skills and greater political interest are most likely to pay attention to the news media" (2000, 227). Although Norris sees attention to news media as a stimulus and not a hindrance to political participation, she acknowledges that "the disengaged are less likely to regard political news as credible, because trust in the news media and government go hand in hand" (317).

W. Russell Neuman describes "a pat- tern of stratification by which the more sophisticated citizens attend to the more political media and are better able to recall and interpret abstract political communications" (1986, 156). In this "spi- ral" less sophisticated citizens may actually reject political information. Mere civic preaching is not going to change the perception that politics does not matter in people's lives or change the sense that less advantaged people cannot succeed against wealthy interests.

Excellent studies by Sidney Verba, Kaye Schlozman, and Henry Brady (1995) show that many poor people pre- fer to invest their dollars and time in organizations such as local churches that produce more tangible rewards than politics (198). Even though people who re- ceive welfare benefits have just as great a stake in election outcomes as people who oppose the capital gains tax, there is a substantial difference in political participation between the two groups. Citizens with more resources-education, income, and efficacy-are more likely to participate on every level.

No doubt, political participation has suffered because of the transformation of American political parties from face-to- face voter recruitment to television evan- gelizing. As field experiments by Alan Gerber and Donald Green (2000) have shown, in-person contact is the most ef- fective way to prod voters to the polls. In a demonstration that practicing politicians actually read political science research, both parties committed themselves to face-to-face contact for the 2004 election. The liberal organization Americans Com- ing Together and Republicans' "Friendly Congregations" are examples of personal contact programs. Even face-to-face efforts fail if non-voters believe that politics makes no difference in their lives. In fact, the cynical belief that it does not matter which party is in power can impede voting even for people well-positioned in terms of resources. Yet, when voting is discussed in the press and in the class- room, the policy consequences of elections are rarely invoked.

What Do Campaigns and Elections Courses Cover?

A non-scientific sampling was made of 52 syllabi that were available on the Internet in the summer of 2003 and that covered some aspect of American campaigns, elections, or political behavior.2

These syllabi varied in their titles, goals, and level.3 The more similar the goals, the more similar the content. Syl- labi for American campaigns and elections generally take as given-that is, they do not discuss alternatives to-the two-party system, the institution of the Electoral College for presidential elections, and the first-past-the-post single- member-district-system for congressional elections. Campaigns and elections courses are dominated by the presidential election process (26) and its unique form of party nominations (22) and lengthy general election campaign (26). Common topics are voting behavior (28), American political parties (19) as well as the temporal, social, and political context of the most recent presidential election (16), campaign finance (21), and news media coverage (24). Courses about campaigning spend a week or more on strategy, campaign consultants, political advertising, and public opinion polling. Because many courses are not taught in presidential election years, many campaigns and elections courses discuss non-presidential elections, but usually only for the House of Represen- tative and/or the Senate (26, including 2 courses focusing exclusively on congressional elections). Courses with political parties in the title (14) devote the most time to political parties and the impact of elections (an average of one week is typically spent on "the party in government"). Only 11 courses (generally not those on political parties) discuss turnout and participation, with the majority spending less than a fraction of a week on these essential topics.

Clearly, campaigns and elections courses cover a lot of ground. It is a sobering thought, however, that by emphasizing the political process, courses reflect the much abhorred media fixation on the "horserace"-about which many critical tomes in the field of political communication have been written. Very few courses about elections focus on the substance that is so often missing from media reports, for example, by asking students to compare the policy positions of competing candidates (2) or how previous elections influenced the course of policy (3 courses). Only 9 courses discussed "why voting matters;" 5 courses included the topic of "reform;" 3 courses specifically put the

58 PS January 2005



U.S. system in a comparative context; and 3 discussed direct democracy.

A Theme of Equality Organizing courses around the theme

of democratic equality would lead instructors to bring to the fore the issues of "representative distortion" (Verba, Schlozman, and Brady's term), which in turn would raise a number of useful topics such as the policy consequences of elections, comparisons with other systems, the central role of political parties in mobilization and governance, and efforts to reform the American system to make elections more democratic. Mak- ing room for these topics could have a salutary civic effect not found in the details of candidate strategy.

Election Consequences It may be helpful to instructors to

present the problem of electoral distortion and voter mobilization through the lens of uses and gratifications (Blumler, Katz, and Gurevitch 1973-1974). While it is difficult to argue the case for rational participation 'a la Downs, the util- ity of voting as an expressive function is far easier to defend. The American elections literature rarely mentions expressive behavior as a reason for voting, an omission, perhaps, that is logical given the limited range of electoral choice in the U.S. Other contemporary democratic systems provide a richer fare across the ideological spectrum. Comparing the experience of other nations with that of the U.S. can illustrate the impact of election and party systems on voter mobilization.4 As Schattschneider wrote:

It takes a special sensitivity to become aware of the needs and experiences of the bottom of the social order. It is one of the great claims of democracy as a moral system that it is able to do this better than any other governmental system, but not all democracies do it equally well. ([1960] 1975, 105)

The study of American elections can only benefit from comparing the U.S. system to other advanced democracies.

A Comparative Context for Reform The strictly U.S. focus in campaigns

and elections courses reflects a general problem in political science. Depart- ments carve up the discipline into a minimum of four compartments, one of which separates American politics from those of the rest of the world. While the barriers between international rela-

tions and comparative politics have come down in some departments, the divide between American and comparative politics seems more daunting. In addition, there are obstacles to a comparative approach that are specific to the study of campaigns and elections.

Comparisons between U.S. elections and those of other advanced, industrial democracies are made perilous by the separation of powers and, therefore, the uncoupling of executive and legislative elections, as well as the enormous power of the American presidency, its distinctive party nominating process, the institutionalization of candidate debates, and the length of the active campaign. While it may seem that including material about non-U.S. elections would overstuff an already jam-packed syllabus, the study of "reform," which comes up regularly in election syllabi, can be the starting point for comparison with other systems. It is notable that one of the few syllabi reviewed that put the word "reform" in the course title- John Carey's "Elections and Reform" at Northwestern-makes the most exten- sive use of non-American examples, including comparisons with the systems of Italy, Russia, China, and Japan.5

Rather than examining only those reform proposals currently on the table in the U.S., instructors might well explore how other nations mobilize the electorate and raise the question whether or not other democracies do a better job of representation than the U.S. The answer for many advanced industrial nations is "yes." The reasons, though numerous, are probably eye-opening for most American students. Studying foreign party systems would bring into the class- room discussion of working class parties, more politicized, broader-based and pow- erful unions, and a system of proportional representation that gives political voice to minority viewpoints. Comparing party systems is a staple of comparative elections courses but is not usually taught in courses on American elections.

Comparisons within the U.S. Courses on campaigns could spend

more time on American elections below the national level. Arguably, almost every presidential election is a unique interplay of economic circumstances, international events, candidates, and voter mood. As many scholars have discov- ered, U.S. Senate and House elections offer many more data points in a given year than presidential elections. State- wide elections also provide natural experiments in the effects of voting laws and procedures, state constitutional re-

quirements, and opportunities for direct democracy, such as referendum and recall. State and local elections offer po- tential direct experience for students in terms of observation, participation, and elite interviewing-far more than presidential or even congressional elections.

Campaigns and elections courses would also benefit from addressing issues of direct democracy, another typically American phenomenon. In recent years, referenda and recall have become important battlegrounds for partisan, corporate, and even religious interests.6 The issue of gay marriage that roiled the nation in 2004, for example, was el- evated to the national agenda by a court ruling legalizing such marriages in Massachusetts. Other state legislatures responded by enacting laws restricting marriage to heterosexual partners (the so-called Defense of Marriage Acts). Some states have moved to amend their state constitutions to prohibit gay marriage. As a result, many Americans con- fronted the issue of gay marriage for the first time on state-wide referendum ballots in the 2004 elections.7

Studying direct democracy would give instructors a chance to contrast referenda with representation in terms of voter mobilization, the levels of citizen information required for democracy, the problem of majority rule, and other issues of democratic theory. By taking up referenda elections, students will have to think about how much democracy they want and whether it is, or is not, a good thing to have a representative electorate.8

Political Parties One of the ways faculty can highlight

the substance and consequences rather than the process of elections, is to spend more time on political parties. In general, courses that put an emphasis on political parties are more likely to discuss the impact of elections on policy. It may be a professional handicap, but political scientists are greater enthusiasts for political parties than any group other than party workers themselves. Unfortunately, while parties may be an easy sell at the graduate level, they are problematic in the undergraduate setting. Sandy Maisel, in a tell-all introduction to his syllabus, explains it this way:

Some professors teach about political parties-their histories, functions, organizations, etc. Students tend to be bored by these courses and deem them irrelevant. One of the things you will learn in this course is the low esteem in which most Americans hold political parties. If you are not enamored with




party politics, party leaders, and the like, you are not alone. And I think the low pre-enrollment of the course reflects this-at least I hope it does.9

It apparently takes some courage to put the words "political party" in the title of an undergraduate course, but a number of faculty buck the trend.

Some Examples To see how to it possible to accom-

plish these goals within the constraints of a single semester, an instructor can turn to some excellent syllabi that emphasize the issues of representative distortion, the meaning of elections, and the comparative context. David Redlawsk's course, "Voting Behavior and Elections" at the University of Iowa devotes three weeks to non-voting and social capital. Charles Prysby spends two weeks on turnout in his course on "Elections and Voting" at UNC-Greensboro. Michael Bobic's course on "Parties and Elections" at Emmanuel College spends three weeks on the party in government. Walter Mebane's course on "Campaigns and Elections" at Comell offers students two weeks on the impact of elections on policy and government. John Carey's course on "Elections and Reform" at Washington University of St. Louis covers both comparative politics and direct democracy. This list is not meant to be exhaus- tive and each of these syllabi has a somewhat different take on the overall subject of campaigns and elections. In- structors should be able to find in these examples something that fits their particular course goals.

Graduate Courses The issues and suggestions raised

here primarily concern the importance of adding new material to already stuffed undergraduate courses. Graduate courses, even more stuffed, are likely to include topics on democratic theory, political parties, the historical impact of U.S. elections, comparative politics, and mobilization. Part of the problem in addressing these topics in undergraduate courses is that they are either perceived as "dry" (that would be political parties) or too sophisticated for undergraduate students (psychology of voting, political economy, etc.).

Notes 1. The issues in statewide elections, such as

education funding, social services for immi-

In addition, the undergraduate study of campaigns and elections shares a problem with economics, math, and the natural sciences. The research literature is often inaccessible to students because it employs highly sophisticated method- ology. In fact, political scientists have long complained that the statistical com- plexity of articles on American elections and voting in the discipline's leading journals are indecipherable to outsiders. Even graduate courses are not immune to this problem.

In a symposium on methodological pluralism published in PS (July 2003), Peregrine Schwartz-Shea and Andrew Bennett's study of seven leading journals in political science showed that from 1975 to 2000, 80 to 90% of articles on American politics employed statistical methods compared to 30 to 48% of international relations and 50 to 68% of comparative politics articles (391). Re- search in American politics was also more likely than research in other fields to employ formal modeling or a combination of formal modeling and statistical methods (388). Commentators agree, however, that these methods are often opaque to graduate students who are not highly trained in their use. For example, James Morrow, whose research involves game theory and statistics, doubts that a general graduate course on methodologies "can teach the ability to read papers critically using those methodologies" (391). And Bear Braumoeller asks: "if a method must be understood at an opera- tional level before research that uses it can be competently evaluated, isn't the distinction between a 'reading competency' and a 'working competency' a chimera?" (388) The current debate over graduate teaching of research methods reflects some of these issues.

Why Shift Emphasis?. Voter inequality and mobilization are

so central to the working of democracy that it is worth the effort to include these topics in both graduate and undergraduate courses on campaigns and elections. It is sobering to realize that more that 40 years ago Schattschneider pre- dicted a crisis in American politics re- sulting from the absence of a large minority of participants from the electorate. He wrote: "Whatever the cause, the

grants, or religious accommodation, may make elections more salient to less sophisticated

present boycott of the political system has brought the political system very near to something like the limit of toler- ance of passive abstention (emphasis in original, [1960] 1975, 107). In spite of his foreboding, turnout continued to decline in subsequent elections. Schattschneider was worried in particular because he thought that simple consent would not be enough for democracies in a world of conflict. Democratic government would require "support," by which he meant an even greater level of legitimacy to allow citizens to face the risks of a dangerous world.

Surely the situation of the U.S. in the world today is no less precarious than in Schattschneider's day. Government needs support to make the dramatic changes that will be necessary to accommodate the aging of the population, its increasing diversity, the adjust- ment to the global economy, and the threat of terrorism. The legitimacy that comes from an ample majority of participants will strengthen American democracy. It makes sense for courses on campaigns and elections to face the problem of electoral abstention head on. At least American students will better appreciate the obstacles in establishing democracies abroad if they understand the challenges at home.

We can take a cue from Schattschneider's tentative recommenda- tions for solving the problem of democratic distortion. He wrote:

The expansion of the participating political community ought to be a major ob- jective of American politics We ought therefore to elicit the support of those people already in the participating political community who are likely to have the greatest interest in its expansion. We ought to look to the newcomers and the less privileged elements of the population to elicit their support for the new programs of public action." (110)

Surely political scientists and teachers of campaigns and elections are among those whose particular interests revolve around the questions of participation. If we think of our students as the significant "newcomers" to whom Schattschneider alludes, then our class- rooms are the places to begin making American elections more effectively democratic.

voters. Roderick Hart and Sharon Jarvis (2003) found that non-college young people are more

60 PS January 2005



likely than college students to be interested in local issues because they remain living in the communities where they grew up while college students move out.

2. An assistant performed on Internet search on July 24, 2003, producing 67 syllabi. Of those, only 53 were analyzed in some detail. The remaining 14 were no longer available as of August or represented an instructor or institution whose syllabus was already included in the list. The syllabi studied are listed in the Appendix. A similar Internet search was performed at the same time for comparative syllabi that included campaigns and elections among their topics. That search resulted in 23 courses, of which two are no longer available. Most of the 21 courses examined are at the graduate level. See Appendix.

3. Among the American government syllabi reviewed, five courses on political behavior did

References Abramson, Paul R., John H. Aldrich, and David

W. Rohde. 1999. Change and Continuity in the 1996 and 1998 Elections. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Braumoeller, Bear F. 2003. "Perspectives on Pluralism." PS: Political Science and Poli- tics 36 (July): 387-389.

Blumler, Jay, Elihu Katz, and Michael Gurevitch. 1973-1974. "Uses and Gratifi- cations Research." In "Directions in Mass Communications Research: A Symposium," Public Opinion Quarterly 37 (winter): 509-523.

Dalton, Russell J. 2001. Citizen Politics in Western Democracies: Public Opinion and Political Parties in the United States, Great Britain, West Germany, and France, 3rd ed. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.

Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.

Gerber, Alan S., and Donald P. Green. 2000. "The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment." American Political Sci- ence Review 94 (September): 653-663.

Ginsberg, Benjamin. 1982. The Consequences of Consent. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Halbfinger, David M. 2003. "Alabama Voters Crush Tax Plan Sought by Governor." New York Times, September 10, A14.

Hart, Roderick, and Sharon Jarvis. 2003. "Re- search Findings from the Campaign for Young Voters." Presented at the National Campaign for Political and Civic Engage-

not have campaign, election, electoral, or voting in their titles. Fourteen courses included political parties in their titles. Seven courses were at the graduate level, four combined graduate and undergraduate students, and 42 were undergraduate courses.

4. Pippa Norris' research, for example, calls attention to the impact of proportional representation on voter turnout (Norris, in Crigler, 2000, 147). See also, Norris 2003.

5. John Carey, Washington University in St. Louis, fall 2002, PSC 342B: Elections and Reform.

6. Bruce Larson's syllabus at Fairleigh Dick- enson includes a section on referenda. See: http://alpha.fdu.edu/-blarson/c&e%20syl.html

7. James Dao, "Legislators Push for State Ac- tion on Gay Marriage," New York Times February 27, 2004, Al.

8. The lack of scholarly and media attention to referenda has made the states easy

ment Researchers' Meeting, Institute of Poli- tics, Harvard University, October 24.

Leighley, Jan E., and Jonathan Nagler. 1992. "Socioeconomic Class Bias in Turnout, 1964-1988: The Voters Remain the Same." American Political Science Review 86 (September): 725-736.

Levy, Shlomit, and Louis Guttman. 1975."Structure and Dynamics of Worries." Sociometry 38 (December): 445-473.

Mansbridge, Jane. 2003. "Rethinking Represen- tation." American Political Science Review 97 (November): 515-528.

Morrow, James D. 2003. "Diversity through Specialization." PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (July): 391-393.

Neuman, W. Russell. 1986. The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Norris, Pippa. 2000. A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in the Postindustrial Soci- eties. New York: Cambridge University Press.

. 2003. Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.

. 2003. "Do Institutions Matter? The Consequences of Electoral Reform for Polit- ical Participation." In Rethinking the Vote: The Politics and Prospects of American Election Reform, eds. Ann Crigler, Marion R. Just, and Edward J. McCaffery. New York: Oxford University Press.

targets for corporate interests. A case in point is Alabama where Governor Bob Riley's plan to equalize the tax structure was defeated in a referendum in which logging interests spent huge sums of money (Halbfinger 2003). In spite of the clear advantages of the new tax plan to middle class and poorer voters, the majority of voters sided with wealthy taxpayers and logging companies to preserve the current regressive tax system. Examining this case and others such as the California bilingual education ballot question will help students appreciate the challenges of democracy and the role of information in electoral decision-making.

9. Sandy Maisel, Colby College: fall 1996, Political Parties and Elections in the United States. http://www.apsanet.org/-pop/Syllabi/ Maisel_214.pdf

Patterson, Thomas. 1980. The Mass Media Election: How Americans Choose Their President. New York: Praeger.

Piven, Francis Fox, and Richard A. Cloward. 2000. Why Americans Still Don't Vote: And Why Politicians Want It That Way. Boston: Beacon Press.

Schattschneider, E. E. [1960] 1975. The Semi- sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press.

Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, and Andrew Bennett. 2003. "Introduction-Methodological Plural- ism in Journals and Graduate Education? Commentaries on New Evidence." PS: Political Science and Politics. 36 (July): 371-372.

Traugott, Michael. 2003. "Why Electoral Re- form Has Failed: If You Build It Will They Come?" In Rethinking the Vote: The Politics and Prospects of American Election Reform, eds. Ann N. Crigler, Marion R. Just, and Edward J. McCaffery. New York: Oxford University Press.

Vanishing Voter Project. 2004. Study by the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. November 11. http://www.vanishingvoter.org/Releases/ releaselll11104.shtml

Verba, Sidney, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.




Appendix American Campaigns and Elections Syllabi on the World Wide Web Date Accessed: July 24, 2003

GRADUATE COURSES Aldrich, John and James Stimson. Duke and the University of North Carolina: Spring 2002. American Macro Politics. http://www.poli.duke.edu/duncaprg/Stimson%202002.pdf

Harvey, Anna. New York University: Fall 1999. Campaigns and Elections.

http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politics/grad/syllabi/G53.2324_harvey-f99.html Johnson, Martin. University of California, Riverside: Winter 2003. Seminar in American Electoral Behavior. http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~martinj/classes/POSC_255_Syllabus_1.pdf

Nagler, Jonathan. New York University. Spring 2001. Campaigns and Elections. http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politics/grad/syllabi/G53.2324_naglers01 .html

Niemi, Richard and Lynda Powell. University of Rochester: Fall 2002. Public Opinion and Electoral Behavior/ Legislative Behavior. http://www.courses. rochester.edu/niemi/PSC51 1 /

Shapiro, Robert. Columbia University: Spring 2000. Public Opinion and Political Behavior. http://www.columbia.edu/itc/polisci/w4238/

Stanley, Harold W. University of Rochester: Fall 2001. Political Parties & Elections. http://www.courses.rochester.edu/stanley/PSC510/

COMBINED GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE COURSES Brady, Dave. Stanford University: Fall 2000. Campaigns 2000. http://www.stanford.edu/class/polisci 179/syllabus.htm

Kunkel, Joe. Minnesota State University, Mankato: Fall 2002. Campaigns and Elections. http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~-jak3/Courses/CAMPAIGNS/482582.html

Southwell, Priscilla L. University of Oregon: Summer 2000. Political Parties and Elections. http://www.uoregon.edu/~polisci/syl clabi/archive/PS400's-500's/PS414-51 4%20%20Political%20Parties%20and%20Elec- tions/PS4-514U00.html

White, John. Catholic University of America: Fall 1997. Voting and Elections. http://www.apsanet.org/-pop/Syllabi/White_523.pdf

(PRESUMED) UNDERGRADUATE COURSES Allin, Craig W. Cornell College: Fall 2002. Campaigns and Elections: In the Wake of A Disputed Presidential Election, In the Midst of a War on Terrorism. http://cornellcollege.edu/politics/courses/allin/363/sytlabus_363-2002a.htm

Anderson, Wayne. Emory University: Fall 2000. Politics of Presidential Elections. http://www.colleges.org/.wanders/syllabus.html

Beckwith, Karen. The College of Wooster: Fall 2000. Political Parties and Elections. http://www.apsanet.org/~pop/Syllabi/Beckwith_206.pdf

Berg, John C. Suffolk University: Fall 2000. Seminar in Campaigns and Elections. http://www.cas.suffolk.edu/berg/syllabi/gov755/syl-755.1htm

Bobic, Michael. Emmanuel College: Fall 2002. Parties and Elections. http://home.eclions. net/mbobic/Parties/syllf02.htm

Campbell, Andrea L. Harvard University: Spring 2003. Campaigns and Elections http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~gov1 352/syllabus/Govi 352syllSpring_2003.htm

Cann, Damon. SUNY- Stony Brook. American Election Campaigns. http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Stu/dcann/syllabus.htm

62 PS January 2005



Carey, John. Washington University-St. Louis: Fall 2002. Elections and Reform. http://www. artsci.wustl.edu/~polisci/carey/psc342b/syllabus2002.pdf

Claibourn, Michele. University of Oklahoma: Fall 2003. Voters and Campaigns http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/C/Michele.P.Claibourn-1 /PSC3433_fa03/psc3433_2003.pdf

Cobb, Michael D. North Carolina State University: Fall 2002. Campaigns and Elections. http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/cobb/p_courses/ps302/ps302%20syllabus.pdf

DeSart, Jay. Florida Atlantic University: Spring 2002. Seminar in Political Behavior. http://www.fau.edu/polsci/6208/syllabus.html

Frendreis, John. Loyola-Chicago. American Political Parties and the Electoral Process. http://www.apsanet.org/~pop/Syllabi/Frendreis_411.pdf

Fuchs, Ester R. Barnard College: Fall 2001. American Parties and Elections. http://www.econ.barnard.columbia.edu/~polisci/courses/43 1 lef01.pdf

Greco, Donald E. Baylor College: Fall 2000. Campaigns and Elections. http://www3.baylor.edu/-DonGreco/3340syl.htm

Hannahan, Michael T. University of Massachusetts-Amherst. Modern Political Campaigns. http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~pols297a/moderncampaignsyllabus.htm

Herrnson, Paul S. University of Maryland: Spring 1998. Political Parties and Elections. http://www.apsanet.org/~pop/Syllabi/Herrnson 474.pdf

Janda, Kenneth. Northwestern University: Fall 1999. Political Parties and Elections. http://janda.org/c24/Syllabus/indexsly.htm

Joslyn, Richard. Temple University: Spring 2002. Campaigns, Elections, and the Media. http://astro.temple.edu/~bstavis/joslyn-ps 127.htm

Kimball, David C. Southern Illinois University: Fall 2000. American Campaigns and Elections. http://www.siu.edu/departments/cola/polysci/s318f00.htm

Larson, Bruce. Fairleigh Dickinson University: Spring 2003. Campaigns and Elections. http://alpha.fdu.edu7~blarson/c&e%20syLhtml

Lengle, James. Georgetown University: Spring 2002. Presidential Electoral Politics. http://www.georgetown.edu/departments/government/faculty/lenglej/PEPunder02.pdf

Levine, Myron. Albion College: Fall 2000. Presidential Campaigns and Elections.

http://www.albion.edu/polisci/315_Campaigns_%20Fall%202000.doc Lewis, Jeremy. Huntingdon College: Fall 2002. Voters, Parties & Elections. http://fs.huntingdon.edu/jlewis/Syl/311Syllabus.htm

Lockerbie, Brad. University of Georgia: Fall 2003. Electoral Behavior. http://www.arches.uga.edu/.Ilockerbi/POLS%204520.pdf

Lombardo, Salvatore. Siena College: Fall 1998. 1998 Congressional Elections. http://www.siena.edu/Iombardo/Spring%201999/sylla329.htm

Lublin, David. American University: 2000. Voting Behavior, Elections, and Campaigns. http://www.american.edu/dlublin/gov656b/syl656.htm

Lupia, Arthur. University California, San Diego: 2000. Voting, Campaigns, and Elections. http://lupia.ucsd.edu/Voting2000.pdf

Maisel, Sandy. Colby College: Fall 1996. Political Parties and Elections in the United States.

http://www.apsanet.org/,.pop/Syllabi/Maisel_214.pdf




Mebane, Walter R. Jr., Cornell University: Fall 2002. Campaigns and Elections. http://macht.arts.cornell.edu/work/wr rm

1/gov317/gov317_syl/gov317 syl.html

Menefee-Libey, David. Pomona College: Fall 2002. Campaigns and Elections. http://www.politics.pomona.edu/dml/electsch.htm

Prysby, Charles. UNC-Greensboro: Spring 2000. Elections and Voting. http://www.apsanet.org/-pop/Syllabi/Prysby_332.pdf

Redlawsk, David. University of Iowa: Spring 2002. Voting Behavior and Elections. http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030111 /votingbehavior/sp2002syll.pdf

Renka, Russell. Southeast Missouri State: Fall 1999. Political Parties and Voting Behavior. http://www.apsanet.org/~pop/Syllabi/Renka_360.html

Rose, Douglas and Norman Mayer. Tulane: Fall 2000. Elections in America. http://www.tulane.edu/~polisci/rose/SylPola3 15.html

Schier, Steven. Carleton College: Winter 2000. Parties, Interest Groups, and Elections. http://www.apsanet.org/~pop/Syllabi/Schier 202.pdf

Schlozman, Kay. Boston College: Fall 2002. American Parties and Elections. http://www.apsanet.org/~pop/Syllabi/Schlozman 306.pdf

Seely, Jennifer and Larry Handlin. University College-Washington University: 1st Summer Session 1997. Elements of Political Behavior. http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~lbhandli/elements.shtml

Serra, George. Bridgewater State College. Congressional Elections and Campaigns. http://webhost.bridgew.edu/gserra/syllabi/po400.html

Sharp, M. Northeastern State University. Campaigns and Elections. http://arapaho.nsuok.edu/-sharp/4283syl.htm

Sulfaro, Valerie A. James Madison University: Fall 2000. Political Parties and Elections. http://raven.jmu.edu/~sulfarva/369page.html

Taylor, Carolyn. Rogers State University: Fall 2002. Campaigns, Elections and Voting. http://www.rsu.edu/faculty/ctaylor/ce_syllabus.htm

Timpone, Richard. Ohio State: 2000. Political Participation and Voting Behavior. http://psweb.sbs.ohio-state.edu/faculty/rtimpone/courses/intsylelect.htm

Wattier, Mark J. Murray State University: Fall 2000. Introduction to Political Behavior. http://campus.murraystate.edu/academic/faculty/mark.wattier/P260f2000.htm

Wilcox, Clyde. Georgetown University: Autumn 2002. Public Opinion and Political Behavior. http://www.georgetown.edu/ faculty/wilcoxc/527.pdf

Comparative Courses That Include Campaigns and Elections Date Accessed: July 24, 2003

GRADUATE COURSES Boix, Caries and Susan Stokes. University of Chicago: Winter 2001. Social Basis of Comparative Politics. http://home.uchicago.edu/~cboix/ps554-syllabus-winter2001 .pdf.

Brown, David S. University of Colorado, Boulder: Spring 2003. Comparative Core Seminar. http://sobek.colorado.edu/

',dsbrown/PSCI7012/Syllabus.htm Brown, Eric C. University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee: Spring 2001. Research Agendas in Comparative Politics. http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/Polsci/syllabi/polsci711 sO 1 .pdf

64 PS January 2005



Dominguez, Jorge I. and Torben Iversen. Harvard University: Fall 2002. Comparative Politics Field Seminar. http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~jidoming/images/gov2105info&syllabus.pdf

Farrell, David. University of Manchester: Spring 2001. Parties and Elections in Western Europe.

http://www.apsanet.org/~pop/Syllabi/Farrell_9251 .pdf

Ledeneva, Alena V. School of Slavonic and East European Studies: Spring 2000. Post-Soviet Politics-Russian Government. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/cds/alcs2.htm

Merlo, Antonio. University of Pennsylvania: Spring 2002. Public Economics II: Political Economy. http://www.ssc.upenn.edu/~merloa/teaching/econ751.pdf

Moon, Woojin. University of California - San Diego: Spring 2003. Comparative Institutional Analyses: Empirical and Formal Studies of Electoral Rules and Behavior. http://weber.ucsd.edu/~wmoon/PS229.PDF

Moon, Woojin University of California - San Diego: Spring 2003. Political Consequences of Electoral Systems. http://weber.ucsd.edu/~wmoon/ps 124A.PDF

Navia, Patricio New York University: Spring 2003. Latin American Politics with a Focus on Elections, Democratization and De- mocratic Institutions. http://pages.nyu.edu/-pdn200/CompPolSyl-LatAm.pdf

Norris, Pippa. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University: Spring 2002. Challenges of Democratization. http://ksghome.harvard.edu/-~.pnorris.shorenstein. ksg/api41 3home.htm

COMBINED GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE COURSES LeDuc, Lawrence. University of Toronto. Comparative Political Parties and Elections. http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/-Ieduc/po1462_syl99.PDF

(PRESUMED) UNDERGRADUATE NON-U.S. COURSES Cutler, Fred. The University of British Columbia. Winter 2002. Public Opinion, Elections, and Representation. http://www.politics.ubc.ca/fcutler/teaching/POLI385/poli385A2003%20outline.pdf

LeDuc, Lawrence. University of Toronto. The Challenge of Direct Democracy. http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/-leduc/pol 199syl. PDF

Mair, Peter. Leiden: Fall 1999. Parties and Party Systems in Europe. http://www.apsanet.org/~.pop/Syllabi/Mair_Europe.pdf

Shevchenko, lulia. European University of St. Petersburg. Nationalism in the Electoral Politics of Contemporary Russia: Party Strategies and Voter Responses http://www.ceu.hu/crc/Syllabi/alumni/nationalism/shevchenko.html

Soroka, Stuart. McGill University: 2003. Contemporary Politics in Western Europe. https://upload.mcgill.ca/politicalscience/course02_poli357.pdf

(PRESUMED) UNDERGRADUATE U.S. COURSES Gerring, John. Boston University: Spring 1998. American Politics in Comparative Perspective.

http://fwww2.h-net.msu.edu/,apsaph/archives/syllabi/gerring2.pdf Hawkins, Kirk. Brigham Young University: Fall 2002. Introduction to Comparative Politics. http://fhss.byu.edc~u/polsci/courses/Fall02/150-001 Fall02.htm

Ray, Leonard. Louisiana State University. Comparative Political Parties and Voting Behavior. http://www. Isu.edu/faculty/Iray2/teaching/7971/.

Zeff, Eleanor. Drake: Fall 2001. Politics and Parliaments. http://www.drake.edu/artsci/PolSci/polsl68.html.




Documents

A Theme of Equality in Campaigns and Elections