scholarly journals Partisan Cycles in Congressional Elections and the Macroeconomy

1989 ◽  
Vol 83 (2) ◽  
pp. 373-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Alesina ◽  
Howard Rosenthal
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Rational Expectations ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
Congressional Election ◽  
Retrospective Voting ◽  
Midterm Elections ◽  
State Of The Economy ◽  
Voting Models ◽  
Better Than

In the postwar United States the president's party has always done worse in the midterm congressional elections than in the previous congressional election. Republican administrations exhibit below-average, and Democratic administrations above-average, economic growth in the first half of each term, whereas in the latter halves the two see equal growth. Our rational expectations model is consistent with these two regularities. In presidential elections, voters choose between two polarized candidates. They then use midterm elections to counterbalance the president's policies by strengthening the opposition in Congress. Since presidents of different parties are associated with different policies, our model predicts a (spurious) correlation between the state of the economy and elections. Our predictions contrast with those of retrospective voting models, in which voters reward the incumbent if the economy is doing well before the election. Our model performs empirically at least as well as, and often better than, alternative models.

Timing and Sequence in Congressional Elections: Interstate Contagion and America's Nineteenth-Century Scheduling Regime

2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott C. James
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Political History ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
Simple Rule ◽  
Congressional Election ◽  
Early State ◽  
Historical Pattern ◽  
Over Time

“The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November”—by this simple rule, Americans organize 435 congressional election contests into one simultaneous collective event. Many—including not a few political scientists—treat this scheduling requirement as though it were an enduring feature of American political history, perhaps even one of the Framers' constitutional stipulations. In fact, the historical pattern is richer and more variegated. For much of the country's first hundred years, diversity, not uniformity, was a defining feature of the congressional election schedule. The non-synchronous character of this first American scheduling regime manifested itself in two especially critical ways. First, non-synchronicity within states separated congressional and presidential elections in time, creating a host of problems for political parties, from the challenges of multiple mobilization efforts, to the difficulties of ensuring a unified party vote across federal elections that could be separated by several months. Second, non-synchronicity across states in congressional elections meant that legislative races unfolded sequentially over time, exposing these predominantly local contests to distinctive interstate contagions—not unlike contemporary presidential primaries—with unexpected partisan showings in early state races helping to shape outcomes in subsequent state contests.

scholarly journals Race, Redistricting, and Re-Election: The Fate of White Incumbent Democrats in the 1994 Congressional Elections

2003 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 337-353
Author(s):  
L. Marvin Overby ◽  
Robert D. Brown
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Multivariate Regression ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
Personal Factors ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Multivariate Regression Model ◽  
Midterm Elections ◽  
Better Than

Critics of racially-motivated congressional redistricting have argued that the practice has numerous negative consequences. Following the Republican victories in the 1994 midterm elections, many critics concluded that the creation of “majority-minority” districts helped the GOP win control of the House of Representatives. In this article we subject that claim to empirical scrutiny. Using a multivariate regression model we examine the electoral fates of white Democrats who had survived the 1992 election. After controlling for other political and personal factors, changes in the racial composition of their districts had little negative impact on these members’ 1994 electoral margins. Moreover, we find that in the South, white Democrats who lost African-American constituents actually fared better than those who had gained them. These results indicate that the impacts of racially-based redistricting are more complicated than many have supposed.

Economic Voting and Economic Inequality: U.S. Presidential Elections 1952–2012

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 589-620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanna Linn ◽  
Jonathan Nagler
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Performance ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Economic Inequality ◽  
Decision Rules ◽  
Economic Voting ◽  
Individual Income ◽  
State Of The Economy ◽  
Fixed Reference ◽  
Election Results

Most economic models of election outcomes make two assumptions: voters look at the aggregate economy, and they compare the state of the economy with some fixed reference. We argue that the increase in economic inequality and slowing of overall growth suggest these assumptions should no longer hold. We propose a theory that allows voters to take into account the distribution of economic growth, and we reconsider different decision rules voters could use to evaluate the incumbent. Analyzing presidential elections from 1952 through 2012, we show that models using the economic performance of individual income quintiles are indistinguishable in overall fit from models using aggregate income to predict election results, but can produce different predictions given different distributions of growth. And we show that voters do not appear to explicitly compare economic performance of the incumbent with the out-party, suggesting they have reneged on their role as rational gods of vengeance.

scholarly journals A Model of the Political Economy of the United States

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Alesina ◽  
John Londregan ◽  
Howard Rosenthal
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Formal Model ◽  
The United States ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
Economic Agents ◽  
Retrospective Voting ◽  
Choice Analysis ◽  
Midterm Elections ◽  
Election Results

We develop and test a model of joint determination of economic growth and national election results in the United States. The formal model, which combines developments in the rational choice analysis of the behavior of economic agents and voters, leads to a system of equations in which the dependent variables are the growth rate and the vote shares in presidential and congressional elections. Our estimates support the theoretical claims that growth responds to unanticipated policy shifts and that voters use both on-year and midterm elections to balance the two parties. On the other hand, we find no support for “rational” retrospective voting. We do reconfirm, in a fully simultaneous framework, the “naive” retrospective voting literature's finding that the economy has a strong effect on presidential voting. We find congressional elections unaffected by the economy, except as transmitted by presidential coattails.

The Responsible Congressional Electorate: Watergate, the Economy, and Vote Choice in 1974

1985 ◽  
Vol 79 (3) ◽  
pp. 788-803 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric M. Uslaner ◽  
M. Margaret Conway
Keyword(s):  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Party Identification ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
Vote Choice ◽  
The Other ◽  
Retrospective Voting ◽  
Financial Conditions ◽  
Political Studies ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Better Than

Most analyses of the 1974 congressional elections have failed to find significant effects for either Watergate or personal financial conditions, despite the prominence of both of these issues in the campaign. An alternative thesis argues that the effect was indirect, through the selection of better-than-usual Democratic candidates and weaker Republican contestants for House seats. Reanalyzing campaign finance data, we challenge this thesis and then move on to a different type of analysis from that which traditionally has been done in retrospective voting studies. With the use of the 1972-1974 panel of the Center for Political Studies, we examine separately the voting behavior of what V. O. Key, Jr. called “standpatters” and “switchers.” The former are motivated primarily by party identification, with small Watergate effects. Our probit analylsis for switchers, on the other hand, finds much weaker party identification effects, but, interestingly, much more pronounced Watergate and economic impacts. Furthermore, an analysis of the sample compared to the population of districts in 1974 suggests that a more representative sample would lead to even more pronounced impacts for Watergate and the economy than even we have found.

The Decline of Electoral Participation in America

1982 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 502-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul R. Abramson ◽  
John H. Aldrich
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Party Identification ◽  
Political Efficacy ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
Congressional Election ◽  
Electoral Participation ◽  
Data Limitations ◽  
Government Responsiveness ◽  
Combined Impact

Since 1960 turnout has declined in presidential elections, and since 1966 it has declined in off-year congressional elections. These declines occurred despite several major trends that could have increased electoral participation. An analysis of the eight SRC-CPS presidential election surveys conducted between 1952 and 1980 and of the six SRC-CPS congressional election surveys conducted between 1958 and 1978 suggests that these declines may result largely from the combined impact of two attitudinal trends: the weakening of party identification and declining beliefs about government responsiveness, that is, lowered feelings of “external” political efficacy. Between two-thirds and seven-tenths of the decline in presidential turnout between 1960 and 1980 appears to result from the combined impact of these trends. Data limitations hinder our efforts to study the decline of congressional turnout, but approximately two-fifths to one-half of the decline between 1966 and 1978 appears to result from the combined impact of these attitudinal trends.

Coattails, Raincoats, and Congressional Election Outcomes

2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-255
Author(s):  
Steven Rogers
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Congressional Election ◽  
Congressional Voting ◽  
Midterm Elections ◽  
Average Rainfall ◽  
Bad Weather ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Identification Strategy

ABSTRACTMore than 60 years ago, Angus Campbell offered an explanation for why the president’s party regularly loses congressional seats in midterm elections. He argued that peripheral voters “surge” to the polls in presidential elections and support the president’s congressional co-partisans but “decline” to turn out in the midterm. In his turnout-based explanation for midterm loss, Campbell speculated that “bad weather or an epidemic may affect the vote” but largely dismissed weather’s utility to test his theory (Campbell 1960, 399). I revisit Campbell’s speculation and employ a new identification strategy to investigate the “surge and decline” account of midterm loss. I show that as the costs of voting increase—due to above-average rainfall on Election Day—the strength of the relationship between presidential and congressional voting weakens.

Electoral Surprise and the Midterm Loss in US Congressional Elections

1999 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 507-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
KENNETH SCHEVE ◽  
MICHAEL TOMZ
Keyword(s):  
Economic Performance ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Congressional Elections ◽  
Macroeconomic Performance ◽  
Systematic Relationship ◽  
Midterm Elections ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
American Political Economy

Alberto Alesina and Howard Rosenthal argue that surprise about the outcomes of US presidential elections accounts for two important features of the American political economy: the regular loss of votes experienced by the president's party in midterm congressional elections, and the systematic relationship between the party of the incoming president and macroeconomic performance. Scholars recently have begun conducting rigorous tests of the relationship between surprise and economic performance, but no similar empirical work exists on how surprise affects midterm elections. In this article, we offer the first direct test of the proposition that electoral surprise drives the midterm loss. Our analysis shows that the more surprised moderate voters are about the outcome of a presidential election, the lower the probability that they will support the president's party in the following midterm contest.

scholarly journals PREDICTION FOR THE 2012 UNITED STATES PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION USING MULTIPLE REGRESSION MODEL

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-97
Author(s):  
Pankaj Sinha ◽  
Aastha Sharma Aastha Sharma ◽  
Harsh Vardhan Singh
Keyword(s):  
Regression Model ◽  
Unemployment Rate ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Multiple Regression Model ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
Gdp Growth Rate ◽  
Proposed Model ◽  
Midterm Elections

This paper investigates the factors responsible for predicting 2012 U.S. Presidential election. Though contemporary discussions on Presidential election mention that unemployment rate will be a deciding factor in this election, it is found that unemployment rate is not significant for predicting the forthcoming Presidential election. Except GDP growth rate, various other economic factors like interest rate, inflation, public debt, change in oil and gold prices, budget deficit/surplus and exchange rate are also not significant for predicting the U.S. Presidential election outcome. Lewis-Beck and Rice (1982) proposed Gallup rating, obtained in June of the election year, as a significant indicator for forecasting the Presidential election. However, the present study finds that even though there exists a relationship between June Gallup rating and incumbent vote share in the Presidential election, the Gallup rating cannot be used as the sole indicator of the Presidential elections. Various other non-economic factors like scandals linked to the incumbent President and the performance of the two parties in the midterm elections are found to be significant. We study the influence of the above economic and non-economic variables on voting behavior in U.S. Presidential elections and develop a suitable regression model for predicting the 2012 U.S. Presidential election. The emergence of new non-economic factors reflects the changing dynamics of U.S. Presidential election outcomes. The proposed model forecasts that the Democrat candidate Mr. Barack Obama is likely to get a vote percentage between 51.818 % - 54.239 %, with 95% confidence interval.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document