This study examines Senator Barack Obama's record as an Illinois State Senator. Specifically, the authors look at his sponsorship and cosponsorship of legislation to determine his level of activity, type of legislation proposed, and overall legislative success. The authors find that Senator Obama was the most active in sponsoring social welfare legislation and using cosponorship as a way to address other substantive policy areas. These findings will be central in how his opponents for the Democratic nomination will characterize him during the nominations process.
Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper.
2.
Fiorina, M.P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections . New Haven: Yale University Press .
3.
Fouchy, B. (2007, April 21). Obama addresses question of experience . The Kansas City Star. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://www.kansascity.com
4.
Funk, C. (1996). Understanding trait references in candidate images . Research in Micropolitics, 5, 97-123.
5.
Funk, C. (1997). Implications of political expertise in candidate trait evaluations. Political Research Quarterly, 50, 675-697.
6.
Hacker, K.L., Zakahi, W.R., Giles, M.J., & McQuitty, S. (2000). Components of candidate images: Statistical analysis of the issue-persona dichotomy in the presidential campaign of 1996. Communication Monographs, 67, 227-238.
7.
Jackson, J.S. (2006). The making of a senator: Barack Obama and the 2004 Illinois Senate race. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University, Paul Simon Public Policy Institute.
8.
Key, V.O. (1966). The responsible electorate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
Kinder, D.R. (1986). Presidential character revisited. In R. Lau & D. O. Sears (Eds.), Political cognition: The 19th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition (pp. 233-256). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Krosnick, J.A. (2002). The challenges of political psychology: Lessons to be learned from research on attitude perception. In J. H. Kuklinski (Ed.), Thinking about political psychology (pp. 115-152). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11.
Markus, G. (1982). Political attitudes during an election year: A report on the 1980 NES panel study. American Political Science Review, 76, 538-560.
12.
Miller, A.H. (1990). Public judgments of Senate and House candidates . Legislative Studies Quarterly, 25, 525-542.
13.
Nelson, T.E., & Oxley, Z.M. (1999). Issue framing effects on belief importance and opinion. Journal of Politics, 61, 1040-1067.
14.
Page, B.I. (1978). Choices and echoes in presidential elections. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
Page, B.I., & Brody, R.A. (1972). Policy voting and the electoral process: The Vietnam War issue. American Political Science Review, 66, 979-995.
16.
Page, B.I., & Jones, C. (1979). Reciprocal effects of policy preferences, party loyalties, and the vote. American Political Science Review , 73, 1079-1089.
17.
Shanks, J.M., & Miller, W.E. (1990). Policy direction and performance evaluation: Complementary explanations of the Reagan elections. British Journal of Political Science, 20, 143-235.
18.
Sirota, D. (2006, June 26). Mr. Obama goes to Washington. The Nation. Retrieved April 5, 2007, from http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060626/sirota
19.
Sniderman, P.M., Brody, R.A., Siegel, J.W., & Tannenbaum, P.H. (1982). Evaluative bias and issue proximity. Political Behavior, 4, 115-131.
20.
Stokes, D.E. (1966). Some dynamic elements of contests for the presidency . American Political Science Review, 60, 19-28.
21.
Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
