An empirical analysis of the U.S. Senate vote on NAFTA and GATT

  • Nipoli Kamdar
  • Jorge G. Gonzalez
Articles

Abstract

This paper examines the determinants of the voting behavior of the U.S. Senate on the North American Free Trade Agreement and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Public choice theory suggests that the voting behavior of senators is influenced by constituent interests, special interest politics, and their ideology. This paper uses probit analysis to test the significance of the above factors. The results indicate that constituent economic interests and special interest money were significant determinants of the Senate voting on the North American Free Trade Agreement but not on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

Keywords

Economic Growth Special Interest Empirical Analysis International Economic Public Choice 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bender, Bruce. "An Analysis of Congressional Voting on Legislation Limiting Congressional Campaign Expenditures,"Journal of Political Economy, 96, 5, 1988, pp. 1005–21.Google Scholar
  2. Boadu, Fred O.; Thompson, Marla R. "The Political Economy of the U.S.-Mexico Free Trade Agreement: Analysis of the Congressional Fast Track Vote,"Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 25, 2, 1993, pp. 27–35.Google Scholar
  3. Brauer, David A.; Hickok, Susan. "Explaining the Inequality in Wages Across Skill Levels,"Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 1, 1, January 1995.Google Scholar
  4. Destler, I. M.American Trade Politics, third edition, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics and New York, NY: The Twentieth Century Fund, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. Hird, John A. "Congressional Voting on Superfund: Self-Interest of Ideology?,"Public Choice, 77, 1993, pp. 333–57.Google Scholar
  6. Hufbauer, Gary C.; Schott, Jeffrey J.NAFTA: An Assessment, revised edition, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. __North American Free Trade: Issues and Recommendations, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1992.Google Scholar
  8. Kalt, Joseph P.; Zupan, Mark A. "Capture and Ideology in the Economic Theory of Politics,"American Economic Review, 74, 3, June 1984, pp. 279–300.Google Scholar
  9. Marks, Stephen V. "Influences on Legislator Voting: Theory and an Example," in E. Brown and R. Moore, eds.,Readings Issues and Problems in Public Finance, third edition, Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1992.Google Scholar
  10. Nollen, Stanley D.; Iglarsh, Harvey J. "Explanations of Protectionism in International Trade Votes,"Public Choice, 66, 1990, pp. 137–53.Google Scholar
  11. Nollen, Stanley D.; Iglarsh, Harvey J.; Quinn, Dennis P. "Free Trade, Fair Trade, Strategic Trade, and Protectionism in the U.S. Congress: 1987–88,"International Organization, 48, 3, Summer 1994, pp. 491–525.Google Scholar
  12. Peltzman, Sam. "Constituent Interest and Congressional Voting,"Journal of Law and Economics, 27, April 1984, pp. 181–210.Google Scholar
  13. Steagall, Jeffrey W.; Jennings, Ken. "Unions, PAC Contributions, and the NAFTA Vote,"Journal of Labor Research, 17, 3, Summer 1996, pp. 515–21.Google Scholar
  14. Weintraub, Sidney. "Modeling the Industrial Effects of NAFTA," in N. Lusting, B. P. Bosworth, and R. Z. Lawrence, eds.,North American Free Trade: Assessing the Impact, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Atlantic Economic Society 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nipoli Kamdar
    • 1
  • Jorge G. Gonzalez
    • 1
  1. 1.Trinity UniversityU.S.A

Personalised recommendations