Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Appearance of CorruptionTesting the Supreme Court's Assumptions about Campaign Finance Reform$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Daron R. Shaw, Brian E. Roberts, and Mijeong Baek

Print publication date: 2021

Print ISBN-13: 9780197548417

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: February 2021

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197548417.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 24 June 2021

The Appearance of Corruption

The Appearance of Corruption

An Introduction

Chapter:
(p.1) 1 The Appearance of Corruption
Source:
(p.iii) The Appearance of Corruption
Author(s):

Daron R. Shaw

Brian E. Roberts

Mijeong Baek

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/oso/9780197548417.003.0001

Chapter 1 describes the Supreme Court’s reasoning on campaign finance regulation, free speech, and political campaigns and then offers a chapter-by-chapter plan for testing the key assumptions underlying the Court’s reasoning. The behavioral model of the Buckley v. Valeo (1976) links individuals’ perceptions of corruption to their decisions to participate politically, hypothesizing that the greater an individual’s perception of corruption the less likely that person is to participate in the political process (e.g., vote) because of an erosion of trust in government. Based on these assumptions, the Court accepts the mitigation of corruption as the (lone) compelling state interest for limits on money in politics. Chapter 1 outlines how the authors will empirically explore the behavioral model posited by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision.

Keywords:   campaign finance laws, corruption, political participation, trust in government, Buckley v. Valeo (1976), Citizens United (2010), campaign spending, campaign contribution, Supreme Court, 1st Amendment speech rights

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .