Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: E-mail emerged not only as a major communication device but also as a new campaign tool in recent years. Due to its easy and low operating cost, major parties and candidates do not monopolize e-mail campaign. On-line activist groups take an advantage of e-mail campaign for their election goals. John Kerry’s official e-mail campaign targeted not only democrats but also moderates and independents. Thus they have some restrictions in selecting words and attacking opponent. On-line activist, on the other hand, have much more specific targeted (more liberals in moveon.org’s case). Thus On-line activists have less restriction to attack their opponents. John Kerry was able to send less negative message due to his attack dog: moveon.org.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Abstract – Campaign finance reform was one of the enduring issues of the 20th century, and in the early years of the 21st century, shows no signs of abating. This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Tillman Act, the first campaign finance reform legislation passed by Congress. This early attempt at campaign finance reform began a pattern of failure that has marked virtually every such effort throughout the century, culminating in the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Act of 2002.

The history of campaign finance reform shows that every attempt to control the flow of money has failed. In fact, many who voted for BCRA were hard at work ensuring that the flow of campaign funds continued, albeit in other directions and to different entities and often without disclosure.

Given 100 years of failed reforms, it is long past time to ask, “What Went Wrong?” The answer is both quite simple and counterintuitive. First, the problem of financing campaigns has been completely misdiagnosed – the corrupting influence is power, not money. Second, the misdiagnosis (i.e., the exclusive focus on money) has led to an improper prescription and a near fatal overdose of regulation. The modern campaign finance regulatory system is held up by two pillars – the laws regarding disclosure and the laws and regulations regarding contributions, expenditures, coordination, etc. The misdiagnosis has been compounded because these two pillars of regulation are not only not complimentary, but actually work at cross-purposes with one another; disclosure is undermined by the other regulations.

(Two explanatory paragraphs omitted here due to space)

The simple inescapable conclusion is that campaign finance regulatory schemes have not only failed but they are working at cross purposes to the disclosure laws. Essentially, we have overmedicated the patient. Doctors over prescribing medication are guilty of malpractice and patients who overmedicate are called addicts. However, the government that over-regulates and the candidate who overdoses are almost expected.

In this paper, I argue that it is results that matter, not good intentions or fashionable regulatory schemes. How do we assure that our political campaigns are as open to public scrutiny as is the government to which we elect candidates for public office? Until we solve this puzzle, we will continue to have government in the sunshine, but campaigns in the dark.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Campaigns and political parties are faced with the immensely important practical challenge of financing their efforts. Raising money is instrumental to all other aims. We also know from recent research that contributors flock together – that campaign contributing is a spatially dependent phenomenon, associated with affluence and the presence of networks. The field of geostatistics presents us with powerful spatial estimation tools that can be of great assistance in providing researchers with the capacity to predict where contributions can be most successfully mined. In this paper we implement two of these tools: kriging and cokriging, and assess their results. The cokriging model produces highly accurate predictions for our study area, and we conclude by commenting on the importance of recognizing that many participatory behaviors are geographically contingent occurrences.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The study of voting behavior has been thoroughly developed in the political science literature. Nonetheless, most theoretical and methodological advancements have been provided by the study of developed democracies, such as the United States and Western Europe. In this paper I argue that it is essential to include the levels of risk aversion or acceptance of individuals as an explanatory variable when we study the voting decisions of the electorate of less developed democracies. In those polities, voters face the possibility of selecting a candidate that could pose a serious threat to the political system. Moreover, I expect that electoral campaigns will have different effects for individuals with diverse risk profiles. I will take advantage of panel survey data collected during the last two presidential campaigns in Mexico and Brazil to address these issues.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Drawing from media richness theory, certain forms of media, such as television, have greater informational impact on viewers and subsequent viewer cognitive information and action than other forms, such as newspapers. Through the use of the American National Election Survey Panel Study: 1990-1992, this longitudinal study examines two forms of media, newspaper and television, as well as war news to determine the influence on political opinion and voter participation. Results indicate that reading the newspaper or attention to campaign material in newspapers has no effect on subsequent political opinion, ideology, or turnout. Increased attention to television news campaign coverage yields a greater likelihood of voting as well as negative feelings about political leaders; however, too much attention to television campaigns creates media saturation level for voter participation and opinions about leaders, suggesting quality, not quantity is an important factor for political reasoning and action.