- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
For more than twenty-five years, campaign finance reform has been based on assumptions that no longer match the realities of modern campaigning. Despite this, many of the supposedly new proposals on the national agenda continue to be based on the old set of assumptions and to produce stalemate.
However, even while Congress has deadlocked, more than half of the states have revised their laws on campaign finance. Some of these are now being promoted actively as models to be emulated. Michael J. Malbin and Thomas L. Gais look at the states to see how campaign finance reforms have actually worked out —what has happened after candidates, political parties, and interest groups have had a chance to adapt to them.
This book is based on a fifty-state survey of campaign finance laws and their administering agencies, analyses of reports from the states that release candidate-level data, and extensive open-ended interviews with political leaders in half a dozen jurisdictions with among the most ambitious regulatory frameworks. It concludes with recommendations based on realistic assumptions set in a package that is designed to remain workable over the long haul.
|2||Laws and Agencies||9|
|3||Turning Laws Into Tasks: The Assumptions Underlying Disclosure||33|
|4||Public Funding: Themes and Variations||51|
|5||Slipping and Sliding: How Interest Groups Have Adapted to Regulation||77|
|6||The Limits of Party Limits||105|
|7||What Helps Competition?||133|
|8||If the Standard Cures Fail, What Can One Do?||161|