 The importance of "Faulty Assumptions" lay in its blending of existing political science research with legal and constitutional theory.Before "Faulty Assumptions", most legal scholarship on campaign finance had followed a narrative that assumed the corruptive and anti-egalitarian effects of large campaign contributions and spending, and had then focused on the creating a legal regime to control those effects and justify regulation against First Amendment claims recognized by the Supreme Court in "Buckley v. Valeo".At the same time, these articles largely ignored a growing literature in political science based on empirical studies of campaign spending and regulatory regimes.