Blog 2.1: The Revolving Door

1. According to the research, who is more likely to become a lobbyist, a member of the House or the Senate?

Members of the Senate are more likely to become lobbyists.

2. Why were Congressmen less likely to become lobbyists in the 1970s and 1980s?

In the 1970s/80s, the lobbying industry was not as big and lucrative as today. 

3. Why does this research likely underestimate the revolving door?

The research only accounts for lobbyists who are registered, and many Congressmen prefer to go unregistered while still doing things that resemble what lobbyists would do. 

4. Why do you think committee chairmen are more likely to become lobbyists?  

Chairmen are more likely to become lobbyists because they most likely have the most connections and power. 

5. Does the author think that registration requirements help prevent former Congressmen from lobbying?  Why?

Tightening restrictions of the revolving door may have lowered the number of former members and staffers registering as lobbyists, but n the end, they all will find a way to lobby without having to register.

6. What is the difference in money spent on lobbying between "public interest lobbies" and corporations?

Corporations spend 34 times the amount public interest lobbies spend.

7. Which of those two groups are the Congressmen more likely to work for?   Why?

Congressmen are more likely to work for corporations because they will a significantly higher amount of money for the lobbying than public interest lobbies.

Blog 1.7: Does Campaigning Work?

1.  What was the overall general finding of Broockman and Kalla’s analysis of campaign activities?

Campaign activities have no effect on voters' choices.

2.  What two-time frames did Broockman and Kalla analyze in their study?

During primary elections and ballot-initiative campaigns

3.  At what rate did they find that people were actually persuaded with campaign activities close to the election?

Close to the election, about 1/800 people reached were persuaded.

4. How were the results different in the study between activities months before the election, and those that occur close to the election day?

The average effect on voter preferences a couple months before the election was close to zero. The sooner you get to the election, the more voters get set in their ways and aren't able to be persuaded to choose another candidate.

5. What types of voting are campaign activities most likely to impact voter outcomes?

Partisanship and significant campaigning

6. What type of effect did they find that canvassing can have?

Personal canvassing within two months of election day had an average effect of negative 1.9 percentage points.

7. What potential lessons could their experiments have for political campaigns in the future?

Campaigns and non-campaign groups should focus more on boosting turnout at the end of a race rather than early on. Campaign funders should consider directing more money to primary election and ballot initiatives. 

8. Describe the two statewide cases where canvassing did have an effect on voter decisions.

In a Democratic primary for mayor of Philadelphia, a Working America canvass 6 weeks before the election increased support for their candidate. In North Carolina, Working America was extremely persuasive: they concluded that the flyer which ridiculed Pat McCrory was only persuasive for black voters. By targeting black households, the effort was successful. 

9. What is the problem with campaign efforts to get new voters registered?

Voter registration is expensive.

10. Why are persuasion efforts mathematically more effective than finding new voters?

Persuasion can effectively net campaigns two votes by subtracting one from the opposing campaign.