Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorMoses, Jonathonnb_NO
dc.contributor.authorGrønning, Lisa-Marienb_NO
dc.date.accessioned2014-12-19T14:36:34Z
dc.date.available2014-12-19T14:36:34Z
dc.date.created2013-10-01nb_NO
dc.date.issued2013nb_NO
dc.identifier655405nb_NO
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/268748
dc.description.abstractIn the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court held that political speech of corporations is entitled to the same rights as political speech by individuals. They ruled that restrictions on independent expenditures by corporations and labor unions are unconstitutional on Frist Amendment grounds. In this thesis I test two hypotheses. First that outside spending in the 2012 Presidential election was abnormally high because of Citizens United and second, that the increase in outside spending benefited the Republican Party in the 2012 Ohio House elections. I find that Citizens United is the reason for the increase in spending by outside groups, and that this benefited the Republican Part in the 2012 Ohio House elections.nb_NO
dc.languageengnb_NO
dc.publisherNorges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, Fakultet for samfunnsvitenskap og teknologiledelse, Institutt for sosiologi og statsvitenskapnb_NO
dc.titleCampaign Finance and the effects of the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commissionnb_NO
dc.typeMaster thesisnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber95nb_NO
dc.contributor.departmentNorges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, Fakultet for samfunnsvitenskap og teknologiledelse, Institutt for sosiologi og statsvitenskapnb_NO


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record