Candidate positioning and responsiveness to constituent opinion in the U.S. House of Representatives
- Michael Peress
- … show all 1 hide
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
In this paper, I develop a survey-based measure of district ideology for the House of Representatives. I use this index to document and study ways in which patterns of candidate positioning depart from perfect representation. These findings help distinguish between competing theories of candidate positioning. My findings present evidence against theories that attribute divergence to the preferences of voters and the locations of primary constituencies. My findings are potentially consistent with the policy-motivation and resource theories, which attribute divergence to the polarization of political elites.
- Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2006). Exploring the bases of partisanship in the American electorate: social identity vs. ideology. Political Research Quarterly, 59, 175–187. CrossRef
- Adams, J., & Merrill, S. (2003). Voter turnout and candidate strategies in American elections. Journal of Politics, 65, 161–189.
- Adams, J., & Merrill, S. (2008). Candidate and party strategies in two-stage elections beginning with a primary. American Journal of Political Science, 52, 344–359. CrossRef
- Adams, J., Merrill, S., & Grofman, B. (2005). A unified theory of party competition. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Adams, J., Brunell, T. L., Grofman, B., & Merrill, S. (2010). Why candidate divergence should be expected to be just as great (or even greater) in competitive seats as in non-competitive ones. Public Choice, 145, 417–433. CrossRef
- Ansolabehere, S., Snyder, J. M., & Stewart, C. (2001a). Candidate positioning in U.S. house elections. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 136–149. CrossRef
- Ansolabehere, S., Snyder, J. M., & Stewart, C. (2001b). The effects of party and preferences on congressional roll call voting. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 26, 533–572. CrossRef
- Ansolabehere, S., Hansen, J. M., Hirano, S., & Snyder, J. M. (2006). The decline of competition in U.S. primary elections, 1908–2004. In M. McDonald & J. Samples (Eds.), The marketplace of democracy. Washington: Brookings Press.
- Association APS (1950). Toward a more responsible two party system. New York: Rinehart.
- Bafumi, J., & Herron, M. C. (2010). Leapfrog representation and extremism: a study of American voters and their members in congress. American Political Science Review, 104, 519–542. CrossRef
- Banks, J. S., & Duggan, J. (2005). Probabilistic voting in the spatial model of elections: the theory of office motivated candidates. In D. Austen-Smith & J. Duggan (Eds.), Social choice and strategic decisions: essays in honor of Jeffrey S. Banks. Berlin: Springer.
- Burden, B. (2004). Candidate positioning in U.S. congressional elections. British Journal of Political Science, 34, 211–227. CrossRef
- Calvert, R. (1985). Robustness of the multidimensional voting model: candidate motivations, uncertainty, and convergence. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 69–95. CrossRef
- Carson, J., Crespin, M., Finocchiaro, C., & Rohde, D. (2007). Redistricting and party polarization in the U.S. House of Representatives. American Politics Research, 35, 878–904. CrossRef
- Coughlin, P. J., & Nitzan, S. (1981). Electoral outcomes with probabilistic voting and Nash social welfare optima. Journal of Public Economics, 15, 113–122. CrossRef
- Cox, G. W., & Katz, J. N. (2002). Elbridge Gerry’s salamander. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
- Enelow, J., & Hinich, M. (1984). The spatial theory of voting: an introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Erikson, R. S., Wright, G. C., & McIver, J. P. (1994). Statehouse democracy: public opinion and the American states. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Fiorina, M. P. (2005). Culture war? The myth of a polarized America. New York: Pearson.
- Flury, B. (1988). Common principal components and related multivariate models. New York: Wiley.
- Gerber, A. S., & Green, D. P. (2000). The effects of canvassing, phone calls, and direct mail on voter turnout: a field experiment. American Political Science Review, 94, 653–663. CrossRef
- Groseclose, T. (2001). A model of candidate location when one candidate has a valence advantage. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 862–886. CrossRef
- Hacker, J. S., & Pierson, P. (2005). Off center: the republican revolution and the erosion of American democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
- Hotelling, H. (1929). Stability in competition. Economic Journal, 39, 41–57. CrossRef
- Huber, G. A., & Arceneaux, K. (2007). Identifying the persuasive effects of presidential advertising. American Journal of Political Science, 51, 957–977. CrossRef
- Jolliffe, I. (1989). Principal component analysis. New York: Springer.
- King, G., Honaker, J., Joseph, A., & Scheve, K. (2001). Analyzing incomplete political science data: an alternative algorithm for multiple imputation. American Political Science Review, 95, 49–69.
- Lambie-Hanson, T. (forthcoming). Campaign contributions as valence. Public Choice. doi:10.1007/s11127-012-9927-y.
- Layman, G. C., & Carsey, T. M. (2006). Changing sides or changing minds? Party identification and policy preferences in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 464–477. CrossRef
- Levendusky, M. S. (2009). The partisan sort: how liberals became democrats and conservatives became republicans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossRef
- McCarty, N., Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (2006). Polarized America: the dance of ideology and unequal riches. Cambridge: MIT Press.
- Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1963). Constituency influence in congress. American Political Science Review, 57, 45–56. CrossRef
- Moon, W. (2004). Party activists, campaign resources and candidate position taking: theory, tests and applications. British Journal of Political Science, 34, 611–633. CrossRef
- Peress, M. (2010). The spatial model with non-policy factors: a theory of policy-motivated candidates. Social Choice and Welfare, 34, 265–294. CrossRef
- Peress, M. (2011). Securing the base: electoral competition under variable turnout. Public Choice, 34, 87–104. CrossRef
- Poole, K. T. (2002). Recovering a basic space from a set of issue scales. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 954–993. CrossRef
- Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (1997). Congress: a political economic history of roll call voting. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Quinn, K. M. (2004). Bayesian factor analysis for mixed ordinal and continuous responses. Political Analysis, 12, 338–353. CrossRef
- Rubin, D. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley. CrossRef
- Schofield, N., & Miller, G. (2007). Elections and activist coalitions in the United States. American Journal of Political Science, 51, 518–531. CrossRef
- Serra, G. (2010). Polarization of what? A model of elections with endogenous valence. Journal of Politics, 72, 426–437. CrossRef
- Serra, G. (2011). Why primaries? The party’s tradeoff between policy and valence. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 23, 21–51. CrossRef
- Silver, N. (2009). Land of a thousand Liebermans. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/02/land-of-thousand-liebermans.html.
- Stone, W. J., & Simas, E. J. (2010). Candidate valence and ideological positions in U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science, 54, 371–388. CrossRef
- Treier, S., & Hillygus, S. (2009). The nature of political ideology in the contemporary electorate. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73, 679–703. CrossRef
- Wittman, D. (1983). Candidate motivation: a synthesis of alternatives. American Political Science Review, 77, 142–157. CrossRef
- Wright, G. C., & Berkman, M. B. (1986). Candidates and policy in the U.S. Senate elections. American Political Science Review, 80, 567–588. CrossRef
- Candidate positioning and responsiveness to constituent opinion in the U.S. House of Representatives
Volume 156, Issue 1-2 , pp 77-94
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Candidate positioning
- Median voter theorem
- Industry Sectors
- Michael Peress (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Political Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA