IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v39y2009i4p696-706.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Functional Federalism in Political Campaign Debates

Author

Listed:
  • Jayne R. Henson
  • William Lyon Benoit

Abstract

Which factors influence the topics addressed by candidates in political debates? This study investigates the question of how the level of elective office influences the content of political debates by employing computer content analysis to investigate the issue emphasis of political campaign debates. Paul Peterson's (1995, The price of federalism. Washington, DC: CQ Press) theory of functional federalism recognizes that political offices at different levels of government have discrete purviews, so that senators are more likely to emphasize national issues than governors. This study confirms the prediction of functional federalism in non-presidential debates and then extends it by demonstrating that presidential campaign messages emphasize federal issues even more than Senate (or gubernatorial) discourse. Copyright 2009, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Jayne R. Henson & William Lyon Benoit, 2009. "Functional Federalism in Political Campaign Debates," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 39(4), pages 696-706, Fall.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:39:y:2009:i:4:p:696-706
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pjp018
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:39:y:2009:i:4:p:696-706. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.