Robin Kolodny | Temple University (original) (raw)

Papers by Robin Kolodny

Lynne Rienner Publishers eBooks, Sep 1, 2007

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Social Science Research Network, 2010

Abstract: The debate over the political power of business has witnessed a revival after the globa... more Abstract: The debate over the political power of business has witnessed a revival after the global financial crisis of 2007-2009. We begin by arguing that business political fragmentation or unity has important consequences for policy outcomes. The structure of ...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Lynne Rienner Publishers eBooks, Dec 31, 2003

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Party Politics, Aug 19, 2016

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Palgrave Macmillan eBooks, Feb 20, 2014

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

When Parties Prosper

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Party Politics, 2009

Copyright © 2009 SAGE Publications Los Angeles London New Delhi www.sagepublications.com ... Marg... more Copyright © 2009 SAGE Publications Los Angeles London New Delhi www.sagepublications.com ... Margit Tavits Andrew Knapp Agnes Batory Florence Haegel Tim Bale Alistair Cole Mariano Torcal Diana Dwyre Kay Lawson Reuven Y. Hazan Frdinand Muller-Rommell John Ishiyama Giacomo Benedetto Takayuki Sakamoto Johnathan R. Hopkin Charles Lees Wouter van der Brug Ian McAllister Susan Scarrow Peter Mair Hanne Marthe Narud Staffan I. Lindberg Miki Kittilson Steven Levitsky Sona Golder Jo Saglie Scott Mainwaring ...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Society, 2016

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2018

We examine the use of JFCs by U.S. Senate candidates before and after the McCutcheon decision to ... more We examine the use of JFCs by U.S. Senate candidates before and after the McCutcheon decision to determine how Senate candidates use these committees and to discover any changes in the use of JFCs and the amounts raised by Senate candidates. We develop a typology of Senate JFCs based the membership of the JFCs and on how the proceeds of the JFC are distributed. This preliminary analysis reveals different types of JFCs, and some modest changes after the McCutcheon decision. We do not find, however, that in the U.S. Senate context, JFCs are significant players that led to an explosion of additional contributions by wealthy donors. Our analysis has made clear that as one digs deeper into the activities of individual JFCs, a much more complex picture emerges of their utility for candidates.

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

American Politics Research, 2017

There is a good deal of discussion currently among political scientists about the nature of polit... more There is a good deal of discussion currently among political scientists about the nature of political parties and the impacts of changing party–group relations. Are so-called outside groups promoting extreme candidates and, thus, contributing to polarization? Or perhaps, party-allied groups follow the party’s lead and support the same candidates the party supports. We view parties as extended party networks (EPNs) and examine the campaign spending practices of formal party organizations (the House congressional campaign committees) and some of the groups that are seen as allied with each party and some we expect to be outside each party’s network. We analyze the levels of congruence and divergence in party and group spending in the 2014 House elections. We find that most nonparty groups support the same candidates favored by the party with which they most identify, and very few are outside each party’s EPN-supporting candidates who are challenging the party’s picks.

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

The Legacy of the Crash, 2011

Although its provenance is uncertain (being variously attributed to Oscar Wilde, George Bernard S... more Although its provenance is uncertain (being variously attributed to Oscar Wilde, George Bernard Shaw and Winston Churchill), the observation that the US and the UK are two nations divided by a common language is often–perhaps too often–repeated. When it comes to politics, however, it is easy to see why. Anyone delving into conservative commentary on the challenges posed (and the opportunities presented) by the current financial and economic crisis finds plenty of transatlantic lessons being drawn. Whether the shining ...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Political Theology, 2012

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Perspectives on Politics, 2013

part from authoritarianism, but only in small part; the two are only weakly correlated. Nor do th... more part from authoritarianism, but only in small part; the two are only weakly correlated. Nor do the measures employed here merely repackage other fundamental political orientations: Ethnocentrism is virtually uncorrelated with party identification, ideological identification, social trust, and opinions about whether American government is bigger than it should be, and it is only weakly correlated with egalitarianism. The remainder of Us Against Them demonstrates that ethnocentrism substantially shapes Americans’ opinions about a wide variety of policies, above and beyond the elements typically used to explain Americans’ policy preferences. Once again, both the analysis and the presentation are meticulous and expansive. Americans with an ethnocentric point of view are more likely to support increased federal spending on homeland security and border security, on national defense in general and on the war on terrorism in particular. They also were more likely to support the war in Iraq and to evaluate the presidency of George W. Bush favorably. The ethnocentric are less likely to support US assistance to other nations in general or to particular nations or foreign groups in need, and they are less favorably disposed toward immigrants to the United States. Ethnocentrism’s influence on Americans’ opinions is not limited to the non-American or new Americans, however. The ethnocentric are less likely to support the rights of gay and lesbian Americans to marry, adopt, and serve in the military. They are less likely to approve of government spending on welfare and food stamps and more likely to approve of adding restrictions to programs designed to help poor Americans. And the ethnocentric are less likely to support government programs that help other racial and ethnic groups. As an indication of the magnitude of these effects, the authors report that the impact of ethnocentrism in general rivals—and often exceeds—the impact of partisanship. While making a persuasive case for the influence of ethnocentrism on policy opinions, Kinder and Kam are also clear about the limits of that influence. They recount at length their search for effects on issues of special concern to women, finding very little. And they frequently note that a variety of other factors remain as influences on policy preferences, even after the impact of ethnocentrism has been taken into account. However, it might be easy to come away from the book with an exaggerated sense of the contribution of ethnocentrism to aggregate levels of support for particular government policies in the United States. Ethnocentrism promotes support for an aggressive approach to terrorism, for example, but the analysis here confirms that the least ethnocentric also tend to support more government spending on homeland security and border security, on national defense and the war on terror. Ethnocentrism promotes whites’ opposition to welfare, but the least ethnocentric white Americans also typically oppose increases in government spending on welfare and food stamps, oppose increases to welfare benefits to women who have additional children, and support limits on the length of time an individual can receive welfare. The least ethnocentric also tend to disapprove of gay sex, teen sex, and extramarital sex, just as the most ethnocentric do. Moreover, while the individual-level effects of ethnocentrism may often approach or exceed those of partisanship, the distribution of ethnocentrism differs considerably from the distribution of partisanship. Kinder and Kam find that a majority of Americans are neutral or very nearly so with regard to ethnocentrism; strong Democrats and Republicans are much more numerous than Americans at either extreme of the measures of ethnocentrism employed here. In the aggregate, then, the potential for ethnocentrism to divide Americans’ policy preferences—and, to the extent that their preferences matter, government policy—may be somewhat limited. Whatever the impact on policy, Us Against Them makes a powerful case for regarding ethnocentrism as an important source of Americans’ preferences on a remarkable range of policy options. Its argument and evidence will require the attention of scholars interested in the roots of Americans’ policy preferences (and its applicability outside the United States is sure to be an area for future research). The book will make a valuable addition to graduate and advanced undergraduate courses on public opinion and political psychology, not only as a source of knowledge about the fundamentals of American politics but also as a model of sophisticated analysis and lucid and lively presentation of first-rate social science.

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

American Political Science Review, 1998

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Party Politics, 1998

Recent efforts by the congressional campaign committees (CCCs), the party organizations charged w... more Recent efforts by the congressional campaign committees (CCCs), the party organizations charged with electing candidates to the US House of Representatives, have been unusually proactive in pursuing House majorities. The CCCs convinced other party-related actors, such as the national committees, political action committees (PACs) and members of Congress, to help achieve majorities in the House. These party-orchestrated activities are notable for their focus on the legislative party's goals, rather than on the party's presidential candidate. The cooperative efforts of the CCCs with their respective national committees, their attempts to induce cooperation from the PAC community, and their outreach for assistance from their own office-holders are explored. These initiatives in the 1990s reflect a significant shift in tactics. They are a reaction to changes in the level of electoral competition, concurrent with the presence of party entrepreneurs who convinced other political a...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Perspectives on Politics

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

People, Passions, and Power Social Movements, Interest Organizations, and the Political Process J... more People, Passions, and Power Social Movements, Interest Organizations, and the Political Process John C. Green, Series Editor Titles in the Series After the Boom: The Politics of Generation X, edited by Stephen C. Craig and Stephen Earl Bennett American Labor Unions in the ...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Lynne Rienner Publishers eBooks, Sep 1, 2007

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Social Science Research Network, 2010

Abstract: The debate over the political power of business has witnessed a revival after the globa... more Abstract: The debate over the political power of business has witnessed a revival after the global financial crisis of 2007-2009. We begin by arguing that business political fragmentation or unity has important consequences for policy outcomes. The structure of ...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Lynne Rienner Publishers eBooks, Dec 31, 2003

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Party Politics, Aug 19, 2016

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Palgrave Macmillan eBooks, Feb 20, 2014

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

When Parties Prosper

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Party Politics, 2009

Copyright © 2009 SAGE Publications Los Angeles London New Delhi www.sagepublications.com ... Marg... more Copyright © 2009 SAGE Publications Los Angeles London New Delhi www.sagepublications.com ... Margit Tavits Andrew Knapp Agnes Batory Florence Haegel Tim Bale Alistair Cole Mariano Torcal Diana Dwyre Kay Lawson Reuven Y. Hazan Frdinand Muller-Rommell John Ishiyama Giacomo Benedetto Takayuki Sakamoto Johnathan R. Hopkin Charles Lees Wouter van der Brug Ian McAllister Susan Scarrow Peter Mair Hanne Marthe Narud Staffan I. Lindberg Miki Kittilson Steven Levitsky Sona Golder Jo Saglie Scott Mainwaring ...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Society, 2016

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2018

We examine the use of JFCs by U.S. Senate candidates before and after the McCutcheon decision to ... more We examine the use of JFCs by U.S. Senate candidates before and after the McCutcheon decision to determine how Senate candidates use these committees and to discover any changes in the use of JFCs and the amounts raised by Senate candidates. We develop a typology of Senate JFCs based the membership of the JFCs and on how the proceeds of the JFC are distributed. This preliminary analysis reveals different types of JFCs, and some modest changes after the McCutcheon decision. We do not find, however, that in the U.S. Senate context, JFCs are significant players that led to an explosion of additional contributions by wealthy donors. Our analysis has made clear that as one digs deeper into the activities of individual JFCs, a much more complex picture emerges of their utility for candidates.

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

American Politics Research, 2017

There is a good deal of discussion currently among political scientists about the nature of polit... more There is a good deal of discussion currently among political scientists about the nature of political parties and the impacts of changing party–group relations. Are so-called outside groups promoting extreme candidates and, thus, contributing to polarization? Or perhaps, party-allied groups follow the party’s lead and support the same candidates the party supports. We view parties as extended party networks (EPNs) and examine the campaign spending practices of formal party organizations (the House congressional campaign committees) and some of the groups that are seen as allied with each party and some we expect to be outside each party’s network. We analyze the levels of congruence and divergence in party and group spending in the 2014 House elections. We find that most nonparty groups support the same candidates favored by the party with which they most identify, and very few are outside each party’s EPN-supporting candidates who are challenging the party’s picks.

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

The Legacy of the Crash, 2011

Although its provenance is uncertain (being variously attributed to Oscar Wilde, George Bernard S... more Although its provenance is uncertain (being variously attributed to Oscar Wilde, George Bernard Shaw and Winston Churchill), the observation that the US and the UK are two nations divided by a common language is often–perhaps too often–repeated. When it comes to politics, however, it is easy to see why. Anyone delving into conservative commentary on the challenges posed (and the opportunities presented) by the current financial and economic crisis finds plenty of transatlantic lessons being drawn. Whether the shining ...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Political Theology, 2012

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Perspectives on Politics, 2013

part from authoritarianism, but only in small part; the two are only weakly correlated. Nor do th... more part from authoritarianism, but only in small part; the two are only weakly correlated. Nor do the measures employed here merely repackage other fundamental political orientations: Ethnocentrism is virtually uncorrelated with party identification, ideological identification, social trust, and opinions about whether American government is bigger than it should be, and it is only weakly correlated with egalitarianism. The remainder of Us Against Them demonstrates that ethnocentrism substantially shapes Americans’ opinions about a wide variety of policies, above and beyond the elements typically used to explain Americans’ policy preferences. Once again, both the analysis and the presentation are meticulous and expansive. Americans with an ethnocentric point of view are more likely to support increased federal spending on homeland security and border security, on national defense in general and on the war on terrorism in particular. They also were more likely to support the war in Iraq and to evaluate the presidency of George W. Bush favorably. The ethnocentric are less likely to support US assistance to other nations in general or to particular nations or foreign groups in need, and they are less favorably disposed toward immigrants to the United States. Ethnocentrism’s influence on Americans’ opinions is not limited to the non-American or new Americans, however. The ethnocentric are less likely to support the rights of gay and lesbian Americans to marry, adopt, and serve in the military. They are less likely to approve of government spending on welfare and food stamps and more likely to approve of adding restrictions to programs designed to help poor Americans. And the ethnocentric are less likely to support government programs that help other racial and ethnic groups. As an indication of the magnitude of these effects, the authors report that the impact of ethnocentrism in general rivals—and often exceeds—the impact of partisanship. While making a persuasive case for the influence of ethnocentrism on policy opinions, Kinder and Kam are also clear about the limits of that influence. They recount at length their search for effects on issues of special concern to women, finding very little. And they frequently note that a variety of other factors remain as influences on policy preferences, even after the impact of ethnocentrism has been taken into account. However, it might be easy to come away from the book with an exaggerated sense of the contribution of ethnocentrism to aggregate levels of support for particular government policies in the United States. Ethnocentrism promotes support for an aggressive approach to terrorism, for example, but the analysis here confirms that the least ethnocentric also tend to support more government spending on homeland security and border security, on national defense and the war on terror. Ethnocentrism promotes whites’ opposition to welfare, but the least ethnocentric white Americans also typically oppose increases in government spending on welfare and food stamps, oppose increases to welfare benefits to women who have additional children, and support limits on the length of time an individual can receive welfare. The least ethnocentric also tend to disapprove of gay sex, teen sex, and extramarital sex, just as the most ethnocentric do. Moreover, while the individual-level effects of ethnocentrism may often approach or exceed those of partisanship, the distribution of ethnocentrism differs considerably from the distribution of partisanship. Kinder and Kam find that a majority of Americans are neutral or very nearly so with regard to ethnocentrism; strong Democrats and Republicans are much more numerous than Americans at either extreme of the measures of ethnocentrism employed here. In the aggregate, then, the potential for ethnocentrism to divide Americans’ policy preferences—and, to the extent that their preferences matter, government policy—may be somewhat limited. Whatever the impact on policy, Us Against Them makes a powerful case for regarding ethnocentrism as an important source of Americans’ preferences on a remarkable range of policy options. Its argument and evidence will require the attention of scholars interested in the roots of Americans’ policy preferences (and its applicability outside the United States is sure to be an area for future research). The book will make a valuable addition to graduate and advanced undergraduate courses on public opinion and political psychology, not only as a source of knowledge about the fundamentals of American politics but also as a model of sophisticated analysis and lucid and lively presentation of first-rate social science.

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

American Political Science Review, 1998

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Party Politics, 1998

Recent efforts by the congressional campaign committees (CCCs), the party organizations charged w... more Recent efforts by the congressional campaign committees (CCCs), the party organizations charged with electing candidates to the US House of Representatives, have been unusually proactive in pursuing House majorities. The CCCs convinced other party-related actors, such as the national committees, political action committees (PACs) and members of Congress, to help achieve majorities in the House. These party-orchestrated activities are notable for their focus on the legislative party's goals, rather than on the party's presidential candidate. The cooperative efforts of the CCCs with their respective national committees, their attempts to induce cooperation from the PAC community, and their outreach for assistance from their own office-holders are explored. These initiatives in the 1990s reflect a significant shift in tactics. They are a reaction to changes in the level of electoral competition, concurrent with the presence of party entrepreneurs who convinced other political a...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

Perspectives on Politics

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact

People, Passions, and Power Social Movements, Interest Organizations, and the Political Process J... more People, Passions, and Power Social Movements, Interest Organizations, and the Political Process John C. Green, Series Editor Titles in the Series After the Boom: The Politics of Generation X, edited by Stephen C. Craig and Stephen Earl Bennett American Labor Unions in the ...

Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact