Out of Step, Out of Office: Electoral Accountability and House Members' Voting
Abstract
Does a typical House member need to worry about the electoral ramifications of his roll-call decisions? We investigate the relationship between incumbents' electoral performance and roll-call support for their party—controlling for district ideology, challenger quality, and campaign spending, among other factors—through a series of tests of the 1956–1996 elections. The tests produce three key findings indicating that members are indeed accountable for their legislative voting. First, in each election, an incumbent receives a lower vote share the more he supports his party. Second, this effect is comparable in size to that of other widely recognized electoral determinants. Third, a member's probability of retaining office decreases as he offers increased support for his party, and this relationship holds for not only marginal, but also safe members.
Additional Information
© 2002 by the American Political Science Association. Published online: 03 March 2004. We thank Steve Ansolabehere, Michael Bailey, Gregory Bovitz, Chappell Lawson, John Lott, Jas Sekhon, and Jim Snyder for helpful comments and Steve Ansolabehere, Gary Jacobson, and Jim Snyder for making available the data on challenger quality and candidates' spending. Any errors, however, are clearly our own.Attached Files
Published - CANapsr02.pdf
Files
Name | Size | Download all |
---|---|---|
md5:33d94966b67c248efbfedfd6e3464b5c
|
150.7 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
- Eprint ID
- 27582
- Resolver ID
- CaltechAUTHORS:20111102-102146032
- Created
-
2011-11-02Created from EPrint's datestamp field
- Updated
-
2021-11-09Created from EPrint's last_modified field