This document discusses how the media can indirectly influence legislative agendas and decision-making. It argues that mass media affects public opinion on issues by how they are portrayed and discussed. When the public feels strongly about an issue due to media coverage, they put pressure on their representatives in Congress to take action. The document examines literature on how the frequency and biased nature of media coverage can increase the salience and importance of issues for the public and affect what legislators prioritize. Case studies are presented to analyze how certain media portrayals have led the public to view topics as critical issues that legislators then feel pressure to address.

1. Kohler 1
Christina Kohler
31 March, 2016
The Media Driven Political Agenda
A primary feature of the United States Congress and state legislatures is the power to
establish the political agenda and make imperative public policy decisions. While multiple
factors affect legislative agenda building, such as personal preferences and partisan pressures, the
mass media and their link to constituents are becoming a vital influence on the behavior of
legislators. The media landscape is changing and news is spreading faster and reaching far more
people than ever before. Media have always participated in politics; however, the first thought
regarding media and politics is less about media affecting the agenda, but rather about media’s
portrayal of politicians in Congress and state legislatures. Another approach should be examined:
how mass media are indirectly affecting legislators and their decision-making. As mass media
communicate news to the public, they affect the public opinion of constituents, which tends to
lead to mass hysteria about a salient issue. As a result, the changing attitudes of constituents due
to media’s representation of an issue, puts pressure on their representatives in Congress and state
legislatures to go into action and influence the public policy agenda to please their constituents.
Prior to examining the role media play in legislative public policy making, the legislative
agenda process and the significance of legislative responsiveness in regard to constituents is
necessary to understand. Following these assessments will be an analysis of literature relating to
the field of media and its effect on the public and behavior of legislators. To what extend the
media impact legislative decisions is hard to numerically measure; however, the following
analysis of the hypothesis that a causal link exists between media, constituencies and legislators,
should confirm that the link is in fact largely present in today’s politics.

2. Kohler 2
Firstly, knowing what the political agenda is in the legislative branch is crucial to
comprehending the connection between media and the actions of legislators. In terms of this
entire analysis, the agenda in Congress and state legislatures will include determining what goes
on the agenda and how the legislators vote for specific policies on the agenda. According to John
Kingdon in his book Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, public policy making is
comprised of a “set of processes,” which include, setting the agenda, specifying alternatives from
which legislators choose from, making an “authoritative choice,” as in a “legislative vote,” and
then implementing the decision (1995, p. 2-3). Kingdon gives a simple definition of
governmental agenda: “list of subjects to which officials are paying some serious attention at any
given time” (1995, p.196). The process of agenda setting narrows the list of subjects legislators
wish to focus on.
According to Kingdon, a reason exists for why some policies become more prominent on
the agenda and why some alternatives are considered more than others (1995, p. 3). Having
alternatives on the agenda, from which a choice is made, requires that a certain factor must
influence a legislator’s decision. These factors can be collective and numerous for a certain issue
on an agenda. Specific policies and problems “occupy the attention of governmental officials”
because officials learn about certain conditions and these conditions become defined through
some means (Kingdon, 1995, p. 197). As it is discussed later, as problems are defined and
learned about, and while other influential factors remain prevalent, the news media stand out
among the influences; the media spread news to the public and legislators, which allows a
condition to become a problem. The media build on a condition of a public issue or concern and
will define that condition for the public.

3. Kohler 3
Secondly, after learning about agenda setting in American politics, studying the
relationship between legislators and their constituency is useful. Constituents are the link
connecting media and congressmen. Although media reach both the public and governmental
officials, the hypothesis focuses on the news media affecting constituents first, which then puts
pressure on legislators. In the United States citizens elect those who will represent them in the
legislature. As a consequence, a legislator tends to care about those who elect him or her,
especially for reelection purposes. In his book Congressmen’s Voting Decisions, Kingdon states
that the constituency is the “only action in the political system to which the congressman is
ultimately accountable” (1992, p. 29). Kingdon considers constituency to be the second most
important influence on legislative voting decisions after fellow congressmen, and sometimes
nearly as important as congressmen (1992, p. 22). Because constituents are a primary influence,
legislators are concerned about the public opinion and attitudes about certain issues on the
agenda.
Constituents may feel strongly about a topic in the news. In response, legislators will play
the role as delegate and “behave in accordance with the wishes of constituents” (Smith et al.,
2015, p. 101). Sometimes it is hard to act as a delegate, when the constituency lacks information
about a topic or if the legislator doesn’t know the majority opinion on an issue. In this case, the
salience of the issue is most likely low and the average person in the constituency doesn’t care
about the outcome. The legislator will act on his or her own judgment and vote how they want.
However, it is often time the case that constituents will reach out to members of Congress or
state legislatures about a certain issue they feel strongly about, once it comes to their attention.
This is direct communication, which is often in the form of mail. The significance of direct
communication from constituents is its use as an attention getter. Problems a congressman might

4. Kohler 4
not be aware of or might be aware of but weren’t “placed in the forefront of his thinking, are
brought to his attention by mail” (Kingdon, 1992, p.55). Now certain problems are brought to a
policy maker’s mind and may be added or taken from the agenda. Direct communication also lets
a legislator know how the constituents think about a certain issue and the intensity of that issue
(Kingdon, 1992, p.55-56). As a result a legislator can act more as a delegate and vote according
to the constituent’s wishes. This is the fundamental link between constituents and legislators.
Public opinion becomes a large matter for legislator decision-making. Even though
legislators will never be able to please everyone in their constituency, as media affect a
constituency and constituents communicate directly with their representatives, legislators will try
vote according to the popular wants and beliefs. According to the book, Agendas, Alternatives,
and Public Policies, public opinion might push items on the legislative agenda “because the vast
number of people interested in the issue would make it popular for vote-seeking politicians”
(Kingdon, 1995, p. 65). Public opinion is an important part of the agenda setting process. It may
direct the government to do something, “but it more often constrains government from doing
something” (Kingdom, 1995, p.65). This establishes the importance of public opinion among
constituencies of state and federal legislators. And how does strong public opinion regarding a
certain issue arise?
Thirdly, with everything that has been said above, it will make sense incorporating the
involvement of media. Kingdon states in, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies that other
scholars have learned that, “the mass public’s attention to governmental issues tracks rather
closely on media coverage of those issues” (1995, p. 57). This can be applied to the
government’s political agenda. In the book, Politics and Public Policy, the authors write, “shifts
in public support for government policies, often stimulated by media coverage, have brought

5. Kohler 5
about important changes” (VanHorn et al., 1992, p. 240). Media’s role has been prevalent in the
past. For example, coverage of the Vietnam War led to mass public hysteria about America’s
involvement, which led to the public’s desire for new governmental policies (VanHorn et al.,
1992, p. 240). Although, that is an extreme example, media coverage is currently influencing
changes in government policy because of an increase in the spread of news to the public through
a variety of mediums.
Reading the literature about the influence of media on the legislative agenda, two major
characteristics stand out; one is the saliency that arises about a particular issue because of the
media and the frequency of presenting that issue to the public. The second characteristic, and the
one that the case studies below will represent, is the bias of the news media and the message that
the media aim at the public. Although media have the power to accomplish these two points, new
media involving online videos and stories, as well as social media, are increasing the
involvement of media in the public and therefore, increasing the pressure that the public will
eventually place on legislators in Congress and state legislatures.
Firstly, a point made in much of the media literature is the frequency as issue is reported
to the public and thus the development of saliency of certain policies. Briefly mentioned earlier,
intensity of public opinion and the saliency of an issue are important factors for legislators to
consider when voting. According to the political journal, Front-Page News and Real-World
Cues: A New Look at Agenda-Setting by the Media, one aspect of the “political agenda” are the
“issues, which reflect the concerns of a large proportion of the general public” (Erbring et al.,
1980, p. 16-17). The importance of saliency is that if an issue on the agenda is a salient one in
the eyes of constituents, legislators will tend to vote in favor of his or her constituents, or
otherwise, run the risk of losing favor with their constituency. Saliency can arise from a number

6. Kohler 6
of factors, such as the people’s problems relating to policy matters, the problem itself inevitably
making itself known, interest groups in efforts to persuade the public, or simply politicians
informing the public about it. The political journal mentioned above mentions these other
factors, including “real-world conditions” or “personal experiences” (Erbring et al., 1980, p. 18).
However, with its own separate agenda, another factor is the mass media, as they spread the
news of a particular issue over multiple platforms and increases the number of times the public
sees a particular issue in the news. Thus, the public naturally places importance on that issue and
establishes a need for it to be on the policy agenda in government.
The high frequency of specific issues appearing in the news builds on the saliency of
those issues. According to the political journal, Front-Page News and Real-World Cues: A New
Look at Agenda-Setting by the Media, constituents in the public will may attention to information
that “they anticipate will be relevant, casually bypassing or forgetting that which is not” (Erbring
et al., 1980, p. 28). The media play a psychological affect on members of the voting public.
Personal relevance to a current policy issue, for example, healthcare, will psychologically force
certain individuals to pay attention to the media coverage that is relevant to them, i.e. healthcare
coverage, or otherwise ignore the media coverage if it does not apply. The high frequency that an
issue, such as healthcare, could be played over the media, would potentially affect the
importance the public places on the policy issue. This leads to another point that as saliency
increases as a result of frequent media coverage, alternatives for legislators to consider will
appear on the agenda. According to the political journal, Front-Page News and Real-World
Cues: A New Look at Agenda-Setting by the Media, “Agenda-setting refers to the process by
which problems become salient as political issues around which policy alternative can be

7. Kohler 7
defined” (Erbring et al., 1980, p. 16-17). Many policies or alternatives regarding a specific issue
within healthcare could then be brought to the agenda for legislators to consider.
Other literature strengthens the argument that the mass media are among the factors
influencing constituency and their policy opinions. Much of the literature on this matter makes
the claim that saliency of matters become political and become part of setting the agenda. In the
academic journal, Media and Agenda Setting: Effects on the Public, Interest Group Leaders,
Policy Makers, and Policy, agenda setting is the “process by which problems become salient as
political issues meriting the attention of the polity” (Cook et al., 1983, p. 17). Media have the
power to change or shape attitudes and opinions of individuals and groups in the public. As a
result, their issue priorities will “shift” (p 17). How this is done is by the immediacy of news and
policy issues appearing in the media and quickly the news can spread to the public.
Secondly in the literature on media and Congress, once an issue is on the agenda and
policy alternatives exist, the next step is media’s development of public opinion about a specific
policy in the agenda. This is when the message and biasness of the media come into the picture.
The media’s message can either be frequently publicized over time or immediate, and will shape
public opinion based on the media’s angle of an issue. If they decide the matter is of great
priority to them, members of a legislator’s constituency will voice their opinion to their
representative, and he or she will act accordingly.
The authors of the academic journal, Media and Agenda Setting: Effects on the Public,
Interest Group Leaders, Policy Makers, and Policy, did a research study to see if the media do
have “agenda-setting capacity, i.e., an ability to influence judgments of issue importance” and
whether that does affect policy (Cook et al., 1983, p. 18). They assigned a sample of 150 people
to an experimental group and then 150 to a control group. Both groups were to watch two

8. Kohler 8
different news programs about fraud and abuse in home health care. One program showed the
“results of an extensive investigation of fraud and abuse in the federally funded home health care
program” while the other program did not go into detail (Cook et al., 1983, p. 19). Policy makers
in government were also part of the experiment. They were interviewed about their views on the
subject and on a variety of other social issues, their estimates of what the public things, and
whether they think policy action is necessary to help the problem of “inadequate home health
care” (Cook et al., 1983, p. 22). The data “strongly” suggest that the target program, the program
showing the fraud and abuse, did influence the issue’s importance in public’s opinion. The data
for the policy makers collected from interviews before and after the experiment, suggest no
difference exists between whether the governmental policy makers were exposed to the media
program or not. Either way the target program did alter their “perception of the issue’s
importance, their belief that policy action was necessary, and their perception of the public’s
view of issue importance” (Cook et al, 1983, p. 28). The results of the study are conclusive that
there is an influential power of the media in political agenda setting. The message of the
influential program was a negative one about the fraud in home healthcare. Most of those who
watched the negative details of this investigative expose developed strong feelings about the
issue and thus had a realization for the need for policy action in the legislature.
The bias of certain media groups on various media platforms causes a biased message to
reach the public, and causes hysteria about the issue. The recent case studies to be analyzed
represent the negative side of the media and how topics become critical issues in the public’s
eyes because the of stretched truth presented to them. The academic journal, The Influence of
News Media on Political Elites: Investigating Strategic Responsiveness in Congress, addresses
the theory that media may affect the behavior of member of Congress because of strategic

9. Kohler 9
responsiveness, meaning taking into account the constituents’ preferences about critical topics in
the current news. Martin Gilens, author of the book Affluence and Influence: Economic
Inequality and Political Power in America, members of Congress are more likely to listen to
their party early in a legislative term and are more likely to be “attentive to their constituents’
preferences as elections approach (as cited in Arceneaux et al., 2016, p. 5). As elections
approach, legislators are keen to make constituents happy and win their vote for reelection. The
authors theorize that the legislator’s do heed their constituents’ preferences, which the media
influences, and that this can especially be seen when an election period is near. “Elections keep
career minded politicians connected to those they represent” (Arceneaux et al., 2016, p. 6).
Regardless of the political context, the article makes it clear that members are more likely to
listen to the constituents when an issue is salient and the media help influence this. Legislators
often have a hard time knowing what their constituents’ preferences are because constituents
may not care as much about some issues on the agenda. Media also provide legislators with
information about what their constituents preferences are based on what they are watching or
reading in the news. Or otherwise, legislators get their information from the constituents
directly. The authors of the academic article write, “legislators are more likely to consider
constituent preferences when voters are paying attention” to the news (Arceneaux et al., 2016, p.
7).
Recently, news media have expanded due to technological advancements. James
Hamilton, author of the article “The Market and the Media” writes that now media companies
have the opportunity to “narrowcast” television content (as cited in Arceneaux et al., 2016, p. 7).
In the case of the journal, The Influence of News Media on Political Elites, television news media
have expanded and with that television news programs and channels based along partisan lines

10. Kohler 10
have emerged. Partisan news media create messages that strongly influence a viewer to think one
way about an issue. The authors specifically looked at Fox News to conduct research. Many
Americans are aware that Fox News offers a conservative view of current political issues.
Authors, Groseclose and Milyo, of the article “A Measure of Media Bias” wrote that Fox News
was the “first partisan network in the cable landscape, and it was rolled out incrementally across
local cable systems” (as cited in Arceneaux et al., 2016, p. 6). During this time Fox News wasn’t
nationally aired, so the researchers could measure more accurately the locations that did see it
and those that did not. The results of the study conducted with Fox News are as follows: of the
members of Congress that were from districts that shows Fox News, Democratic members had a
faster rate of declining partisanship than non-Fox News members, and Republican members had
an increasing rate of partisanship than non-Fox News Republicans who remained moderate
(Arceneaux et al., 2016, p. 15). These results prove that Fox News had power over the decisions
made in Congress. The constituencies that saw the news broadcast, whether they were
Republican or Democrat, shifted their views to a more conservative stance, which shifted their
representative’s views and consequently their actions in Congress. Since Fox News is a
conservative news network, the Republicans became more conservative while the Democrats
moved away from their liberal views to more conservative. Media have grown extensively since
this study because of the number of mediums that are now available and media’s political
influence has most likely grown as well.
Lastly, although the traditional print media are still influential in politics, in recent years
television, online, and even social media have advanced their political influence. Mentioned
above the television medium for news has expanded and now with far more news channels, more
individuals in legislator’s constituencies are exposed. Following television is the expanding

11. Kohler 11
influence of online media sources and even social media. The case studies below present data for
online media influence. Besides online, social media are becoming a fairly recent tool for
spreading news. Because this is the newest form of media involved in the political arena, it is not
yet a subject that has been thoroughly investigated. The academic article “The Impact of Twitter
Adoption on Decision Making in Politics” discusses a study conducted last year to prove that the
social networking service, Twitter, impacts voting behavior of Congressmen. The study
compared the differences in voting behavior before and after joining Twitter. The main finding
was that after the adoption of Twitter, the “political difference between Congressmen and the
constituent shrinks” (Mousavi & Gu, 2015, p. 4858). This means that as a result of Twitter and
its use to communicate information among the public, Congressmen learned more about their
constituency and shifted their voting behavior to match. More specifically it means that a
Congressman who was more conservative than their constituents, had a less conservative voting
behavior after the adoption of Twitter (Mousavi & Gu, 2015, p. 4861). The same goes for
Democrats and their liberal voting behavior in comparison with their less extreme constituency.
Social media are at the beginning of investigation so research is still limited. However, from this
study, researchers have learned that social media have an impact on voting behavior on policies
in Congress because of the affect it has on their constituency.
Finally, analyzing two recent case studies extends the research about media’s message
and it’s impact on the interest of the public and thus its impact on Congressmen and state
legislator’s agenda setting and voting behavior. The first case study is the release of the Planned
Parenthood videos. According to the Web-based research center, Media Matters for America, in
July 2015, Center for Medical Progress, a pro-life organization, released a series of videos,
which they secretly filmed in Planned Parenthood clinics. The videos claimed to show that

12. Kohler 12
Planned Parenthood employees were trying to sell fetal organs and other body parts. According
to Media Matters, the videos have been “deceptively edited” and the information is false and
Planned Parenthood had no wrongdoing (Power, 2015). When the videos were released, they
went viral on YouTube and other online networking sites, causing interest from the general
public to skyrocket. Figure 1 below represents the Google data collected from “Google Trends”
showing the frequency of people searching the term “Planned Parenthood Video” on the Internet.
The peak of interest takes place during the month of July when the videos were released.
Figure 1
After the release of these videos, during an interview with CQ Role Call, Representative
Tim Murphy, who is a member of the House Pro-Life Caucus, said he had seen the clip weeks
before. The interviewer asked why he and others waited until the week the videos came out to
“take action” (Khurshid, 2015). Murphy’s response was simply that he did not know and then
asked not to be quoted from the interview. Another Pro-Life Caucus Representative Trent Franks
of Arizona also said that he had seen the video a month before (Khurshid, 2015). Franks gave an

13. Kohler 13
evasive answer. However, with the videos released, and the public reacted, legislators took
action. In response to the videos and the public outcry, Senator Rand Paul introduced a bill to
basically defund Planned Parenthood. He wanted to “strip Planned Parenthood of the federal
dollars it receives annually” (Power, 2015).
This Planned Parenthood case gets to the point of this analysis of the media because from
interviews with Representatives in Congress, it is clear that lawmakers were not stimulated into
action when they had simply seen the videos. They acted once the videos not only reached the
public, but also caused a spike in the public’s interest. This could mean that Congressmen did not
have as much of an interest pursuing the matter because they believed the videos were false.
Once there was a media outcry then they were forced to react. Or it could mean that the
Congressmen intended to act but wanted to wait for a spike in interest to get enough momentum
behind their agenda. Either way, this case study proves that media’s message, in this case online
media, influenced public opinion about Planned Parenthood, who pressured their representatives
in Congress.
The second case study focuses on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that was passed
in the legislature and then signed by Governor Mike Pence in Indiana in mid March 2015. This
study focuses on the outburst of media and the public as a result of the passing of the act. The act
states that a business can refuse to serve a gay couple because it’s their religious freedom. As a
result of the opposition outburst, legislators in Indiana’s state government worked on reforming
the newly passed act. According to the article, “Indian Gov. Mike Pence signs revised RFRA
bill,” the new version of the act was passed in both houses in the legislature after many “hours of
discussion” (Rader, 2015). Figure 2 shows the outburst after the bill was signed through the use

14. Kohler 14
of data from Internet searches. The outburst begins decreasing around the time the reformed bill
was signed at the beginning of April.
Figure 2
The unique characteristic of this case study is the use of social media, especially Twitter,
to spread the opposition about this bill. According to the article, “Internet Reacts to Indiana’s
New Religious Freedom’ Law,” the newly passed act has “quickly ricocheted to the top of
Internet chatter and is the focus of tweets and posts from a range of public figures” (Abramson,
2015). The use of this form of media connects regular people with the media. Legislators
respond simultaneously to the media and the constituents directly involved with the social media.
Also with the rise of social media more people become aware of the issue and react in the same
way. Mass hysteria about the issue result and legislators listen. This case study is another
example of the major impact media can have on legislator’s behavior in Congress and state
legislatures.
While there is strong reason to believe that media does have an indirect influence on
legislators through their constituencies, a few drawbacks exist that hinder this hypothesis.

15. Kohler 15
Mentioned briefly above, measuring the specific influence media has over legislators is difficult.
The authors of the journal, Front-Page News and Real-World Cues: A New Look at Agenda-
Setting by the Media, mention the difficulty to measure the distribution of media to the public
and the saliency the public places on issues (Erbring et al., 1980, p. 18). In addition to the
difficulty of measuring saliency, measuring to what extend legislators take media into
consideration is hard. Measuring this link from one issue or event to another may be the most
effective means to finding out media’s impact, like what was done with the case studies above.
However, this also may not be as accurate as a researcher might hope. Other factors such as
personal preferences, interest groups, and fellow congressmen are in the picture. Media’s
presence among these factors is there but to what extent is hard to determine.
In addition to the difficulty of measuring, the knowledge that media have other influential
factors in politics makes it difficult to differentiate between them for a specific issue. First of all
there may be a more direct approach between media and members of Congress, which
completely bypasses constituents. Legislators might only change their approach because they see
the media about an issue and their opinion changes as a result. This is a matter of personal
preferences, rather than constituency, in which members vote based on what they want to see on
the agenda. According to Media and Agenda Setting, in the study that was conducted using two
groups to watch two different news programs regarding abuse and fraud in home healthcare, the
researchers came to the conclusion that although members of the public were “aroused over the
expose” there was a chance they were skipped when influencing legislators (Cook et al., 1983, p.
32). The conclusion suggests that legislators are not aware of the problem until they see it in the
news and as a result change their voting behavior, regardless of what their constituents are
thinking.

16. Kohler 16
With everything mentioned above still in mind, the concluding thought is that the link
between media’s impact on constituents and legislator’s responsiveness to constituents is a
realistic and important link in legislative politics. Media have always had a role in the political
arena; however, to be more specific, this role takes advantage of the public’s opinion to affect the
voting behavior of legislators. From the research above, especially with the second case study, an
exciting discovery has been made regarding the new forms of media. Ordinary people in the
public have the power to be a part of the media through social media. Because of this new
development media and the constituents have converged and now legislators listen to both
simultaneously. Media has the power to strongly influence public opinion and the fact that this is
either a natural consequence of media or not is unclear. For the argument of this analysis, it is not
important. Although to what extent the hypothesis of this paper is true, the literature and research
used uphold the hypothesis that media can cause public interest of a topic to increase rapidly,
which has the power to change the way a legislator thinks about that topic in terms of policy
making and voting behavior.

17. Kohler 17
References
Abramson, A. (2015, March 30). Internet Reacts to Indiana's New 'Religious Freedom' Law.
Retrieved March 27, 2016, from http://abcnews.go.com/US/internet-reacts-indianas-
religious-freedom-law/story?id=30007776
Arceneaux, K., Johnson, M., Lindstädt, R. and Vander Wielen, R. J. (2016), The Influence of
News Media on Political Elites: Investigating Strategic Responsiveness in Congress.
American Journal of Political Science, 60(1), 5–15. doi: 10.1111/ajps.12171
Cook, F. L., Tyler, T. R., Goetz, E. G., Gordon, M. T., Protess, D., Leff, D. R., & Molotch, H.
L.. (1983). Media and Agenda Setting: Effects on the Public, Interest Group Leaders,
Policy Makers, and Policy. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 47(1), 16–32. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2748703
Erbring, L., Goldenberg, E. N., & Miller, A. H.. (1980). Front-Page News and Real-World Cues:
A New Look at Agenda-Setting by the Media.American Journal of Political
Science, 24(1), 16–28. http://doi.org/10.2307/2110923
Google Trends. (n.d.). Retrieved March 26, 2016, from https://www.google.com/trends/
Khurshid, S. (2015, July 16). Lawmakers Knew About Planned Parenthood Video Weeks Ago
(Video). Retrieved March 26, 2016, from http://www.rollcall.com/218/interview-didnt-
happen/?dcz
Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Harper Collins College.
Kingdon book at home
Mousavi, R., & Gu, B. (2015). The Impact of Twitter Adoption on Decision Making in Politics.
2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 4854-4861. Retrieved

18. Kohler 18
March 26, 2016, from
https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/hicss/2015/7367/00/7367e854.pdf.
Power, L. (2015, July 23). How A Lie Becomes A Law: GOP Introduces Legislation To Defund
Planned Parenthood Based On Deceptively Edited Videos. Retrieved March 26, 2016,
from http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/23/how-a-lie-becomes-a-law-gop-
introduces-legislat/204559
Rader, K. (2015, April 01). Indiana Gov. Mike Pence Signs Revised RFRA Bill. Retrieved
March 27, 2016, from http://www.wthr.com/story/28698272/clock-is-ticking-on-rfra-
clarification-at-indiana-statehouse
Smith, S. S., Roberts, J. M., & Wielen, R. J. (2015). The American Congress (9th ed.).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
VanHorn, C. E., Baumer, D. C., & Gormley, W. T., Jr. (1992). Politics & Public Policy.
Congressional Quarterly.