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.

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 elections, to the presidential nominating process and campaign finance laws. Ultimately, Streb argues for a less burdensome democracy, a democracy in which citizens can participate more easily in transparent, competitive elections. This book is designed to get students of elections and American political institutions to think critically about what it means to be democratic, and how democratic the United States really is. Part of the Controversies in Electoral Democracy and Representation series, edited by Matthew J. Streb.

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.

Across the country, races for judgeships are becoming more and more politically contested. As a result, several states and cities are now considering judicial election reform. Running for Judge examines the increasingly contentious judicial elections over the last twenty-five years by providing a timely, insightful analysis of judicial elections. The book ties together the current state of the judicial elections literature, and presents new evidence on a wide range of important topics, including: the history of judicial elections; an understanding of the types of judicial elections; electoral competition during races; the increasing importance of campaign financing; voting in judicial elections; the role interest groups play in supporting candidates; party organizing in supposedly non-partisan elections; judicial accountability; media coverage; and judicial reform of elections.

Running for Judge is an engaging, accessible, empirical analysis of the major issues surrounding judicial elections, with contributions from prominent scholars in the fields of judicial politics, political behavior, and law.

Contributors: Lawrence Baum, Chris W. Bonneau, Brent D. Boyea, Paul Brace, Rachel P. Caufield, Jennifer Segal Diascro, Brian Frederick, Deborah Goldberg, Melinda Gann Hall, Richard L. Hasen, David Klein, Brian F. Schaffner, and Matthew J. Streb.

This volume explores the state of academic freedom in the United States and abroad. What impact have the attacks of September 11th and the ensuing war on terrorism had on free speech, access to information, government funding of the sciences, and other cornerstones of freedom of inquiry at American universities? How has the renewed emphasis on patriotism affected the "culture wars" that aroused so much controversy on American campuses? And how does academic freedom in the United States compare to that of other nations?
To engage these crucial questions, the editors have assembled some of the nation's leading experts on academic freedom, from a broad range of disciplines including law, political science, and the history of science.

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 elections, to the presidential nominating process and campaign finance laws. Ultimately, Streb argues for a less burdensome democracy, a democracy in which citizens can participate more easily in transparent, competitive elections. This book is designed to get students of elections and American political institutions to think critically about what it means to be democratic, and how democratic the United States really is. Part of the Controversies in Electoral Democracy and Representation series, edited by Matthew J. Streb.

Once largely ignored, judicial elections in the states have become increasingly controversial over the past two decades. Legal organizations, prominent law professors, and a retired Supreme Court justice have advocated the elimination of elections as a means to choose judges. One of their primary concerns is interest group involvement in elections to state supreme courts, which they see as having negative effects on both the courts themselves and public perceptions of these judicial bodies. In The Battle for the Court, Lawrence Baum, David Klein, and Matthew Streb present a systematic investigation into the effects of interest group involvement in the election of judges. Focusing on personal-injury law, the issue that has played the most substantial role in spurring interest group activity in judicial elections, the authors detail how interest groups mobilize in response to unfavorable rulings by state supreme courts, how their efforts influence the outcomes of supreme court elections, and how those outcomes in turn effectively reshape public policies. The authors employ several decades’ worth of new data on campaign activity, voter behavior, and judicial policy-making in one particularly colorful, important, and representative state—Ohio—to explore these connections among interest groups, elections, and judicial policy in a way that has not been possible until now.

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 ow political elites respond--or do not respond--to public polls. the contributors assert that while polls treat z 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.

This volume explores the state of academic freedom in the United States and abroad. What impact have the attacks of September 11th and the ensuing war on terrorism had on free speech, access to information, government funding of the sciences, and other cornerstones of freedom of inquiry at American universities? How has the renewed emphasis on patriotism affected the "culture wars" that aroused so much controversy on American campuses? And how does academic freedom in the United States compare to that of other nations? To engage these crucial questions, the editors have assembled some of the nation's leading experts on academic freedom, from a broad range of disciplines including law, political science, and the history of science.

View the Table of Contents. Read the Chapter One.

aRunning for Judge is an important source of empirical data about judicial elections. Anyone who studies the topic should have a copy.a
--"New York Law Journal"

aThis book offers a variety of insights by professors across the country on issues that are becoming increasingly important in judicial elections. . . . The collection will interest scholars and students of federalism, judicial politics and state politics in general.a
--"Campaigns & Elections"

aThe book does a wonderful job of bringing the different research projects together. All the chapters provide detailed and timely information in an effort to explain recent developments in judicial elections....This is a comprehensive, well-written book.a
--"Law & Politics Book Review"

"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 Supreme Court in American Politics"

Across the country, races for judgeships are becoming more and more politically contested. As a result, several states and cities are now consideringjudicial election reform. Running for Judge examines the increasingly contentious judicial elections over the last twenty-five years by providing a timely, insightful analysis of judicial elections. The book ties together the current state of the judicial elections literature, and presents new evidence on a wide range of important topics, including: the history of judicial elections; an understanding of the types of judicial elections; electoral competition during races; the increasing importance of campaign financing; voting in judicial elections; the role interest groups play in supporting candidates; party organizing in supposedly non-partisan elections; judicial accountability; media coverage; and judicial reform of elections.

Running for Judge is an engaging, accessible, empirical analysis of the major issues surrounding judicial elections, with contributions from prominent scholars in the fields of judicial politics, political behavior, and law.

Contributors: Lawrence Baum, Chris W. Bonneau, Brent D. Boyea, Paul Brace, Rachel P. Caufield, Jennifer Segal Diascro, Brian Frederick, Deborah Goldberg, Melinda Gann Hall, Richard L. Hasen, David Klein, Brian F. Schaffner, and Matthew J. Streb.