Matching Items (3)
Description
Since the passage of the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 (FECA) up until the most recent election in 2012, presidential campaign funds have risen over five hundred percent. While money has always been an essential and critical part of any political campaign, this rise has been drastic and continues to increase at a higher rate with every election cycle, even when the numbers are adjusted for inflation. The purpose of this paper is to examine this continuous increase in cost of presidential campaigns and to analyze the different pieces that have contributed to this rise. The main pieces include two Supreme Court cases: Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, the rise and fall of federally regulated public funding and the various pieces of a presidential campaign that have considerably higher ticket prices with each election cycle. This paper first goes through both Buckley and Citizens, describing what each Supreme Court decision did and how they effected how much money can be spent in a presidential campaign and by whom. The paper then examines each presidential election since the passage of FECA in 1974 through the last election with President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2012. Each election cycle is broken down to show how much money was spent by each candidate and the Republican and Democratic National Committees, whether or not the money was received through public funds or raised privately, and subsequently the percentages of where the money was spent. While the examination of the Court cases helps to understand why so much money can be donated and contributed directly to campaigns or spent on behalf of a presidential candidate, the breakdown of where the money is spent including advertising, travel, staff salaries etc. helps to show why a presidential campaign costs over five hundred percent more today than it did forty years ago. By understanding this increase, how it was caused and where the money is going, it is more feasible to comprehend whether or not campaign finance reform should be proposed and if so, how it should be brought about.
ContributorsColby, Mikaela Nicole (Author) / Critchlow, Donald (Thesis director) / Shair-Rosenfield, Sarah (Committee member) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
There is extensive analysis previously done on the US State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. Mainly, the literature investigates biases, topical attention shifts, and changes in the content and length of the reports over time. In aggregate, findings indicate that the State Department reports institutionalized, standardized, and converged with other reports. This honors thesis applies the expectations set by the previous literature to the analysis of reports from a singular country, Venezuela. Two Venezuelan presidential transitions and one US presidential transition provided the opportunity to qualitatively observe changes in reporting and potentially contextualize those changes with the effects of the presidential transitions. The prominent changes observed in the reporting during these periods include topical attention shifts related to democratization and elections in Venezuela and changes in reporting for minority communities.
ContributorsJacks, Madison A (Author) / Wright, Thorin (Thesis director) / Kaire, Jose (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
It happened in 1824. Again, it happened in 1876. And 1888. And then again in 2000. Most recently, in 2016. Five times the president has been elected through the Electoral College without attaining the popular vote. Is this a feature, bug, or necessary evil of the electoral system? While the support for the national popular vote movement has grown significantly in the past decade, there are many fervent opponents. Many of the adversaries to a popular vote system argue that under a national popular vote system, candidates would visit only the most densely populated areas in the country and then simply work to get all votes possible, gaining enough support to win the election without gaining much support from the rest of the country. To analyze these key arguments, this paper tests two hypotheses, the first of which is that under a popular vote system, densely populated areas are given more attention from presidential candidates than would be proportionately expected based on population. The second hypothesis is that candidates will spend more money on advertising per person in larger cities than in smaller cities. This paper will outline research from both a social media analysis and from a statistical analysis of specific state Senate elections and their media markets before concluding by refuting the two hypotheses and suggesting that a national popular vote system would not cause vast populations of Americans to be ignored any more than they currently are.
ContributorsJackman, Julia Mcallister (Author) / German, Zachary (Thesis director) / Bowie, Sean (Committee member) / School of Civic & Economic Thought and Leadership (Contributor) / School of Molecular Sciences (Contributor) / School of Human Evolution & Social Change (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-12