You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
While frustration with various aspects of American democracy abound in the United States, there is little agreement over—or even understanding of—what kinds of changes would make the system more effective and increase political participation. Matthew J. Streb sheds much-needed light on all the major concerns of the electoral process in the thoroughly revised third edition of this timely book on improving American electoral democracy. This critical examination of the rules and institutional arrangements that shape the American electoral process analyzes the major debates that embroil scholars and reformers on subjects ranging from the number of elections we hold and the use of nonpartisan...
"This outstanding collection of essays provides new insight into one of the most important features of the American judicial system. Matthew J. Streb has assembled a first-rate set of contributors who offer a fascinating exploration of the institutions, incentives, and democratic consequences of electing judges."--Kevin T. McGuire, author of Understanding the U.S. Supreme Court "A timely and important addition to the literature on state courts and judicial politics by a stellar team of contributors. New research is presented on a range of issues that will interest scholars and students not only of courts but state politics more generally."--David M. O'Brien, author of Storm Center: The Supre...
Though the courts have been extremely active in interpreting the rules of the electoral game, this role is misunderstood and understudied—as, in many cases, are the rules themselves. Law and Election Politics illustrates how election laws and electoral politics are intertwined, analyzing the rules of the game and some of the most important—and most controversial—decisions the courts have made on a variety of election-related subjects. More than a typical law book that summarizes cases, Mathew Streb has assembled an outstanding group of scholars to place electoral laws and the courts‘ rulings on those laws in the context of electoral politics. They comprehensively cover the range of topics important to election law—campaign finance, political parties, campaigning, redistricting, judicial elections, the Internet, voting machines, voter identification, ballot access, and direct democracy. This is an essential resource both for students of the electoral process and scholars of election law and election reform.
This hard-hitting and engaging examination of polls and American politics asks an essential question: do polls contribute to the vitality of our democracy or are they undermining the health of our political system? Leading scholars address several key issues such as how various types of polls affect democracy, the meaning attributed to polling data by citizens and the media, the use of polls by presidents, and how political elites respond—or do not respond—to public polls. The contributors assert that while polls tread a fine line between informing and manipulating the public, they remain valuable so long as a robust democracy obliges its political leaders to respond to the expressed will of the people.
Ought judges be independent of democratic pressures, or should they be subjected to the preferences and approval of the electorate? In this book, Bonneau and Hall use empirical data to shed light on these normative questions and offer a coherent defense of judicial elections.
"In Electing Judges, James L. Gibson responds to the growing chorus of critics who fear that the politics of running for office undermine judicial independence. While many people have opinions on the topic, few have supported them with empirical evidence. Gibson rectifies this situation, offering the most systematic study to date of the impact of campaigns on public perceptions of fairness, impartiality, and the legitimacy of elected state courts-and his findings are both counterintuitive and controversial"--Page [four] of cover.
This is a provocative examination of the current state of academic freedom in the United States and around the world.
Top US legal scholars and political scientists examine how the law shapes judges’ behavior and decisions, and what it means for society at large. Although there is a growing consensus among legal scholars and political scientists, significant points of divergence remain. Contributors to What’s Law Got to Do with It? explore ways to reach greater accord on the complexity and nuance of judicial decision making and judicial elections, while acknowledging that agreement on what judges do is not likely to occur any time soon. As the first forum in which political scientists and legal scholars engage with one another on these hot button issues, this volume strives to establish a true interdisc...
Recognized as a Choice Outstanding Academic Title in 2011! Many people complain about the complex system used to nominate presidents. The system is hardly rational because it was never carefully planned. Because of the dissatisfaction over the idiosyncrasies of the current system, periodic calls arise to reform the presidential nomination process. But how are we to make sense of the myriad complexities in the system as well as in the calls for change? In The Imperfect Primary, political scientist Barbara Norrander explores how presidential candidates are nominated, discusses past and current proposals for reform, and examines the possibility for more practical, incremental changes to the electoral rules. Norrander reminds us to be careful what we wish for—reforming the presidential nomination process is as complex as the current system. Through the modeling of empirical research to demonstrate how questions of biases can be systematically addressed, students can better see the advantages, disadvantages, and potential for unintended consequences in a whole host of reform proposals.