Originally published in Contemporary Psychology: APA Review of Books, 1994, Vol 39(2), 225. Reviews the book, The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion by John Zaller (1992). The author's commendable effort to specify a model of mass opinion formation offers readers an introduction to the prevailing vi

The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion.

Expression vs. Equality: The Politics of Campaign Finance Reform. By J. Tobin Grant and Thomas J. Rudolph. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press, 2004. 144p. $59.95 cloth, $21.95 paper. Through a series of experiments embedded in a national survey, J. Tobin Grant and Thomas J. Rudolph systematically examine attitudes toward campaign finance reform in a very interesting and compelling manner. In a thorough analysis, they examine the commitment citizens have to the competing democratic values of political equality and political expression, finding that opinion varies depending upon perceptions of whose rights are being threatened. The central thesis of the research, which is well established with a comprehensive literature review and theoretical analysis, is that public opinion on campaign finance reform is group-centric, a function of the views individuals have toward groups that are thought to be affected by the proposed reform. If individuals feel positively about a group that is seen as being threatened by the reform, they will be negatively inclined toward the reform. Conversely, if individuals view the group with suspicion or negativity, they will favor the reforms. The research represents a systematic analysis of public opinion on campaign finance reform on a nation level, examining the factors that impact opinions and the dynamic manner in which opinions are formed and maintained.

Expression vs. Equality: The Politics of Campaign Finance Reform

The just completed 2010 elections show how truly broken our national campaign finance system really is. The integrity of our elections, and ultimately our governance, depends on a vigorous debate in which American citizens truly have a voice. Unfortunately, our elections no longer focus on the needs and interests of individual voters, but are instead shaped by multi-million dollar ad campaigns funded by special interest groups with seemingly limitless resources. The power to control the political dialogue of campaigns is useful to these special interests because of the resulting power that is gained in the legislative process. This is the real danger of unrestricted campaign expenditures that elected officials legislate on behalf of corporations, unions, and other powerful organizations instead of their constituents. The American people are well aware of this problem. In a recent poll, nearly eighty percent of Americans agreed that members of Congress are controlled by special interest money to the exclusion of their constituents.1 Although I believe that members of Congress are honest and highly dedicated public servants, I agree that our campaign finance system

/pdf/amend-the-constitution-to-restore-public-trust-in-the-4zzony6tqu.pdf

Amend the Constitution To Restore Public Trust in the Political System: A Practitioner's Perspective on Campaign Finance Reform

We model attitudes about Congress as structured by perceptions of campaign finance. Attitudes about unlimited corporate and union spending are modeled as structured by knowledge about Congress. We ...

To Know It Is to Loath It: Perceptions of Campaign Finance and Attitudes About Congress:

Those seeking to influence campaign finance policy often invoke public opinion to support their legal and policy arguments. Thus, an understanding of the factors that explain citizens' views about the topic can help illuminate the political landscape surrounding it. This study examines the foundations of public opinion about campaign finance issues that emerged in the wake of the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United. An analysis of original data from a national survey found that political predispositions—including party identification, political ideology, external political efficacy, trust in corporations, and political interest/attention—predicted individuals' opinions, as did use of the Fox News cable channel and satirical television news programs. The results speak to how a range of actors may shape and capitalize on the nature of public opinion here.

L LambeJennifer

Papers

The Foundations of U.S. Public Opinion About Campaign Finance in the Post-Citizens United Era