The paper described here is optional. If you choose not to write this paper, you must take the midterm exam. The grade for this paper stands in place of the midterm exam grade.
This optional paper has three parts. Your paper must address all three parts in content, although it need not be divided explicitly into three parts. A unified discussion is likely to be preferable.
Part I: Pick a congressional (i.e., U.S. House) district in the 2004 election in which an incumbent is running for reelection. For three individuals and three PACs that made a hard money contribution to the incumbent sometime during the current two-year campaign period (2003-2004), explain what interests apparently motivated each individual and each PAC to contribute. Investigate the incumbent's committee memberships and roll call votes, special interest group ratings, federal expenditures in the district or other concrete facts to construct plausible arguments regarding the contributors' motivations. It may be very difficult to decide whether a contributor has benefitted from any particular federal expenditure, either before or after the election, so don't despair if you can't pin down such information--but also don't give up too easily. For individual contributors, the individual's employer (or occupation) as recorded in the Federal Election Commission Itemized Contributions data files will almost certainly be good evidence regarding the material concerns the person is bringing to the campaign.
Part II: Connect your analysis in Part I either to the new soft money or to the presidential or national congressional campaigns (or both). For the relationship to the new soft money, establish a connection between at least one of the contributors discussed in Part I, either an individual or a PAC, and one or more 527 groups. Say something interesting about the link (e.g., why has someone both given hard money and put money into a 527 group, why does an organization have both a PAC and a 527 group, do there appear to be informal alliances between a PAC and a 527 group). For the connection to the national campaigns, identify and explain contributions at least two individuals have made either to a presidential candidate or to one of the congressional campaign committees. Note that 527 groups are most likely to have documented activity in the presidential campaign, so the boundary between the two options I have described for this part may be fuzzy. Feel free to mix and match in reasonable and interesting ways.
Part III: Use your findings from Parts I and II, along with relevant material from course readings and other information as you see fit, to discuss how campaign money seems to be being used to enhance political influence. You should relate your discussion to the relevant essays in volumes edited by Magleby (2002) and Malbin (2003).
The paper should be no more than 15 double-spaced ``typed'' pages in length.
The paper is due in class on Thursday, October 14. Use normal
citation formats for bibliographic references. Be sure to include the date of
access along with the URL for any citations to web pages. For a description
of formats used in political science journals see
http://macht.arts.cornell.edu/work/wrm1/gov317/APSRcitation.htm.
IMPORTANT: You must let me know as soon as possible which district and incumbent you plan to study. To choose a district you may find it helpful to consult the Election Returns web sites, just to get a sense of the range. Email your selection to me (wrm1@cornell.edu), by Thursday, September 16. I will allow only one person to study each incumbent--first come, first served. If I haven't received your district choice and approved it by September 23, I will not accept a paper from you. If I don't get an acceptable paper proposal from you, you will be deemed to have opted to take the midterm exam scheduled for October 7. If you propose to write a paper but subsequently change your mind, you have until the date of the midterm to decide to take that exam instead. You may work together to gather information for the paper.
Some web sources with information that should be helpful for this assignment are listed on the syllabus. The opensecrets and FECInfo sites are probably essential for finding information about contributors. The Congressional Directory site has information about House Members' committee memberships during the 107th Congress. The Project Vote Smart site has extensive information about interest group ratings of House members, among other useful information. Thomas is a comprehensive portal to information about Congress, including information about which bills each House Member sponsored or cosponsored, and roll call votes. Of course you are free to consult any other sources you think may help your investigations.