Advertisement

Political Behavior

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 43–66 | Cite as

Party Identification and Vote Choice in Partisan and Nonpartisan Elections

  • Chris W. BonneauEmail author
  • Damon M. Cann
Original Paper

Abstract

For decades, scholars have been interested in the effect of party identification on vote choice. Indeed, candidate party affiliation is seen as the most meaningful cue to voters in terms of which candidate they should support. However, there is a large set of elections in the U.S. that are nonpartisan. Using both experimental data and the first national survey of voters in judicial elections, we probe the effectiveness of the nonpartisan ballot format in keeping partisan considerations out of citizens’ minds when voting in judicial elections. Results based on the experimental and observational data are consistent and show that voters’ decisions are influenced strongly by party identification in both partisan and nonpartisan elections. This suggests that in judicial elections voters are able to successfully bring partisan and/or ideological information to bear on their voting decisions in both partisan and nonpartisan ballot formats, rendering nonpartisan elections ineffective at removing the partisan element from elections.

Keywords

Judicial elections State politics Partisanship 

References

  1. Abramowitz, A. I., & Segal, J. A. (1992). Senate elections. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  2. Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. (1998). Ideological realignment in the American Electorate. Journal of Politics, 60, 634–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adrian, C. R. (1959). A typology for nonpartisan elections. Western Political Quarterly, 12, 449–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldrich, J. (1995). Why parties? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alvarez, R. M., & Nagler, J. (1995). Economics, issues and the Perot Candidacy: Voter choice in the 1992 presidential election. American Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 714–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. American Political Science Association. (1950). Toward a More responsible two-party system: A report of the committee on political parties. American Political Science Review, 44, 1–96.Google Scholar
  7. Ansolabehere, S., Persily, N., & Stewart III, C. (2010). Race, region, and vote choice in the 2008 election: Implications for the future of the Voting Rights Act. Harvard Law Review, 123(6), 1385–1436.Google Scholar
  8. Baum, L. (2003). Judicial elections and judicial independence: The voter’s perspective. Ohio State Law Journal, 64(1), 13–42.Google Scholar
  9. Baum, L., & Klein, D. (2007). Voter responses to high-visibility judicial campaigns. In M. J. Streb (Ed), Running for judge: The rising political financial and local stakes of judicial elections. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Berkowitz, D., & Clay, K. (2006). The effect of judicial independence on courts: Evidence from the American States. Journal of Legal Studies, 35(2), 399–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Berry, C. R., & Howell, W. G. (2007). Accountability and local elections: Rethinking retrospective voting. Journal of Politics, 69, 844–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bonneau, C. W. (2001). The composition of State Supreme Courts, 2000. Judicature, 85, 26–31.Google Scholar
  13. Bonneau, C. W., & Cann, D. M. (2013). Individual-level factors and voter participation in judicial elections. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the midwest political science association, Chicago, 11–14 April 2013.Google Scholar
  14. Bonneau, C. W., & Hall, M. G. (2009). In defense of judicial elections. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Brace, P., Langer, L., & Hall, M. G. (2000). Measuring the preferences of State Supreme Court Judges. Journal of Politics 62, 387–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brambor, T., Clark, W. R., & Golder, M. (2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Burbank, M. J. (1997). Explaining contextual effects on vote choice. Political Behavior, 19(2), 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Caldarone, R. P., Canes-Wrone, B., & Clark, T. S. (2009). Partisan labels and democratic accountability: An analysis of State Supreme Court abortion decisions. Journal of Politics, 71, 560–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W., & Stokes, D. (1960). The American voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Campbell, D. E., Green, J. C., & Layman, G. C. (2011). The party faithful: Partisan images, candidate religion, and the electoral impact of party identification. American Journal of Political Science, 55(1), 42–58.Google Scholar
  21. Carlton, A. P. (2003). Justice in Jeopardy: Report of the American Bar Association Commission on the 21st century judiciary. Chicago: American Bar Association. http://www.abavideonews.org/ABA263/finalreport.pdf.
  22. Cover, A. D. (1977). One good term deserves another: The advantage of incumbency. American Journal of Political Science, 21, 23–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. DeSantis, V. S., & Renner, T. (1991). Contemporary patterns and trends in municipal government structure. In The municipal year book. Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association.Google Scholar
  24. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  25. Fiorina, M. (2002). Parties and partisanship: A 40 year retrospective. Political Behavior, 24(2), 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Geyh, C. G. (2003). Why judicial elections stink. Ohio State Law Journal 64, 43–79.Google Scholar
  27. Glick, H. R., & Emmert, C. F. (1987). Selection systems and judicial characteristics: The recruitment of State Supreme Court Judges. Judicature, 70, 228–235.Google Scholar
  28. Green, D. P., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2002) Partisan hearts and minds: Political parties and the social identity of voters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hall, M. G. (2001). State Supreme Courts in American Democracy: Probing the myths of judicial reform. American Political Science Review, 95, 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hall, M. G. (2007). Competition as accountability in State Supreme Court elections. In M. J. Streb (Ed)., Running for judge: The rising political, financial, and local stakes of judicial elections. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hall, M. G., & Bonneau, C. W. (2013). Attack advertising, the white decision, and voter participation in State Supreme Court elections. Political Research Quarterly, 66, 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Highton, B., & Kam, C. (2011). The long-term dynamics of partisanship and issue orientations. Journal of Politics, 73, 202–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hinich, M. J., & Munger, M. (1997). Analytical politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Huckfeldt, R., Levine, J., Morgan, W., & Sprague, J. (1999). Accessibility and the political utility of partisan and ideological orientations. American Journal of Political Science, 43, 888–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kam, C. D. (2005). Who toes the party line? Cues, values, and individual differences. Political Behavior, 27, 163–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Keith, B. E., Magleby, D. B., Nelson, C. J., Orr, E., Westlye, M. C., & Wolfinger, R. E. (1992). The myth of the independent voter. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  37. Kenny, C. (1998). The behavioral consequences of political discussion: Another look at discussant effects on vote choice. Journal of Politics, 60(1), 231–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. King, G., Tomz, M., & Wittenberg, J. (2000). Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 341–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Layman, G. C. (1997). Religion and political bahavior in the United States: The impact of beliefs, affiliations, and commitment from 1980 to 1994. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 288–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Levendusky, M. S. (2009). The partisan sort: How liberals became democrats and conservatives became Republicans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Levine, J., Carmines, E. C., & Huckfeldt, R. (1997). The rise of ideology in the Post-New Deal Party System, 1972–92. American Politics Quarterly, 25, 19–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mayhew, D. (2008). The incumbency advantage in U.S. Presidential Elections: The historical record. Political Science Quarterly, 123, 201–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Page, B. I., & Shapiro, R. Y. (1992). The rational public: Fifty years of trends in Americans’ policy preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rabinowitz, G., Gurian, P.-H., & Macdonald, S. E. (1984). The structure of presidential elections and the process of realignment, 1944 to 1980. American Journal of Political Science, 28(4), 611–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Riker, W. H., & Ordeshook, P. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review, 62(1), 25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rock, E., & Baum, L. (2010). The impact of high-visibility contests for U.S. State Court Judgeships: Partisan voting in nonpartisan elections. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 10, 368–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schaffner, B. F., Streb, M., & Wright, G. (2001). Teams without uniforms: The nonpartisan ballot in state and local elections. Political Research Quarterly, 54, 7–30.Google Scholar
  48. Schattscheider, E. E. (1942). Party Government. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
  49. Schotland, R. A. (2003). To the endangered species list, Add: Nonpartisan judicial elections. Willamette Law Review, 39, 1397–1422.Google Scholar
  50. Skaggs, A., da Silva, M., Casey, L., & Hall, C. (2011). The new politics of judicial elections 2009–10. http://newpoliticsreport.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/JAS-NewPolitics2010-Online-Imaged.pdf.
  51. Squire, P., & Smith, E. R. A. N. (1988). The effect of partisan information on voters in nonpartisan elections. Journal of Politics, 50, 169–179.Google Scholar
  52. Streb, M. J. (2009). The need for more individual-level judicial election data. Justice System Journal, 30(3), 307–314.Google Scholar
  53. Williams, K. C. (2013). Introduction to game theory: A behavioral approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations