Normative democratic theorists have posited a strong linkage between public preferences and political outcomes (Dahl 1963, 1991). A number of prominent empiricists have furthered these claims, providing evidence that policy is directly influenced by the will of the people (Stimson, Erikson, and Mackuen 1995, 2002; Page and Shapiro 1983, 1992). In contrast, V.O. Key argued that politicians are chiefly responsible for the movement of public opinion (1961). In this framework, the central explanation for the covariance between public opinion and policy lies not with the electorate, but rather strategic politicians who endeavor to move opinion toward their preferred position. Empirical evidence confirming public opinion/mood and policy move conjointly fails to unveil the direction of causality. A significant body of research has demonstrated the instrumental role of the media in information-processing and decision-making (Iyengar 1991, Mutz 1998); additional studies have pointed to the influential role of the media in the movement of policy (Page 1996, Kellstedt 2003). Despite this body of evidence, scholars have not incorporated the media into their models of public opinion and policy change, nor have researchers considered the role of policy experts. These considerable omissions confound the evidence that institutions are responsive to the electorate. This dissertation seeks to explore the relationship between policy movement, public opinion, media, and policy experts using the issue of the minimum wage from the time of its inception to the present. The student employs a variety of statistical methodologies to investigate unresolved questions of central importance to democratic theory. First, among Congress, the media, the public, and policy experts, who influences whom? He addresses this question in a dynamic context, shedding new light on the nature of policy influence. Second, he considers the timing of policy movement. That is, when and why does policy reach the national agenda? Leading methodologists have entreated researchers to pay heed to the timing of political events (Bartels and Brady 1993, Box-Steffensmeier and Jones 2004). Finally, he analyzes the rhetoric of politicians and media elites and its consequences for policy transition. Broader Impact: Little work in political science has focused on the issue of rhetoric, yet language and argumentation constitute the essence of political persuasion (Riker 1986). Taken together, this dissertation adds to the understanding of the forces of influence and change accounting for policy movement.
