Author's Keywords: judicial elections, campaign finance, state supreme courts	Convention Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p42033_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Peters, C.. "Financing Judicial Elections: The effects of money on state supreme court elections." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2008-12-12 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p42033_index.html>

Peters, C. S. , 2005-09-01 "Financing Judicial Elections: The effects of money on state supreme court elections." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2008-12-12 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p42033_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: In recent years the cost of judicial elections has increased substantially, prompting many reformers, including the American Bar Association and the Justice at Stake Campaign, to propose public financing of judicial elections. Although recent research has begun to explore issues of competition (Hall 2001), candidate recruitment (Bonneau and Hall 2003, Hall and Bonneau 2003), investigations into the role of money in judicial elections is just beginning (Bonneau 2004, 2005). Consulting the recent work of Melinda Gann Hall and Chris W. Bonneau, as well as the extensive literature on campaign financing of Congressional elections, this paper builds a simple model to explain incumbent electoral performance in races in which they face a challenge. Examining the 56 races in which incumbents faced challengers from 2000-2004, I find that the incumbent’s vote share in such races is determined primarily by incumbent spending, and not by challenger spending or characteristics of the challenger. These findings are preliminary, but once subjected to testing over longer time periods with more sophisticated methods, the findings will be able to shed considerable light on an important issue of debate: the possible effects of proposed electoral reforms on judicial independence and accountability.

The Effects of State Campaign Finance Regulation on Turnout, Electoral Competition, and Partisan Advantage in Gubernatorial Elections, 1949-1998

Incumbent Spending and Campaign Finance Reform in State Supreme Court Elections