Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Adam J. Ramey, Jonathan D. Klingler, Gary E. Hollibaugh Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. For years, countless scholars have posited the role of constituency and party pressure on legislators’ roll call voting records. Indeed, though popular estimates of legislators’ preferences often come from roll call data (e.g., DW-NOMINATE scores), most scholars are careful to note that these are not necessarily measures of ideology per se but rather of legislators’ revealed preferences—that is, they reflect both legislators’ ideological commitments as well as the influence of party and constituency. In this paper, we offer fairly robust evidence that existing measures of legislator behavior may be closer to their preferences than once thought. Using a novel survey of former members of the House of Representatives, we leverage the severing of the electoral connection and lack of institutional party pressure to show that legislators’ preferences as measured by existing methods closely mirror their own perceptions of themselves. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-06-23T05:13:16Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221106425
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Spencer Lindsay Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Multiple theoretical orientations propose a link between economic anxiety and racial attitudes. This article explores this link using three studies. The first study uses observational data from the 2016 CCES and ANES to determine whether or not anticipating a loss in income in the coming year is associated with negative racial affect. The second study uses observational data from the 2020 CCES to determine whether or not perceiving a greater risk of personal discrimination is associated with racial resentment. The last uses an original survey experiment from the 2020 CCES to gain insight into how priming intergroup competition shapes whites’ racial attitudes. These studies find an association between perceived economic threat and negative racial attitudes. However, the way respondents perceive economic threats seems to be largely shaped by partisan identification with Republicans perceiving greater levels of threat. They also suggest that material and symbolic threats may be mutually reinforcing. These findings support the claim that racial attitudes are deeply connected to economic anxieties and provide insight into how party identification shapes our psychology. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-06-21T12:34:50Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221110038
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Andrew Ballard, Ryan DeTamble, Spencer Dorsey, Michael Heseltine, Marcus Johnson Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Civility in political discourse is often thought to be necessary for deliberation and a healthy democracy. However, incivility is on the rise in political discourse in the United States—even from members of Congress—suggesting that political incivility may in fact be a tool to be used strategically. When and why, then, do members of Congress use incivility in their rhetoric' We develop and test expectations for the usage of political incivility by members of Congress on Twitter, using every tweet sent by a member of Congress from 2009–2020 coded for the presence of uncivil rhetoric via a novel application of transformer models for natural language processing. We find that more ideologically extreme members, those in safer electoral situations, and those who are in a position of political opposition are more likely to use incivility in their tweets, and that uncivil tweets increase engagement with members’ messages. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-06-21T12:29:09Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221109516
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Paul A. Djupe, Jacob Neiheisel Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. The anti-LGBTQ politics of the Religious Right has been implicated as one of the critical forces promoting the rise of disaffiliation from religion. The association seems plain given the rapid rise of the nones among younger cohorts of Americans – a group which also holds the most pro-LGBTQ attitudes. However, little work actually tests the link between shifting attitudes on same-sex marriage and declining religious behavior and affiliation. Drawing on the Portraits of American Life Panel study with waves in 2006 and 2012, we use appropriate measures to document the religious effects of changing views on same-sex marriage. We find that while shifting views did have a negative effect on church attendance and affiliation, these effects were not limited to shifts toward support for same-sex marriage and were not limited to liberals. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-06-12T11:47:31Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221106431
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Gregg R. Murray, Susan M. Murray Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Informed by the public health policymaking literature, this study’s objective is to identify scientific, political, social, economic, and external factors related to U.S. governors’ decisions to issue stay-at-home orders (SAHOs) in response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public health experts advocate for social distancing to slow the spread of infectious diseases, but government mandates to social distance can impose substantial social and economic costs. This study uses event history analysis to investigate the issuance of COVID-19-related gubernatorial SAHOs during a 41-day period in the 50 U.S. states. The findings indicate that scientific, political, and economic factors were associated with the issuance of SAHOs, but that external considerations played the largest role, particularly those related to the timing of other governors’ decisions. This study offers evidence about how some U.S. political leaders balance public health concerns against other considerations and, more broadly, how state governments address crisis-level issues. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-06-10T09:40:01Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221106933
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Jamie M. Wright, Scott Clifford, Elizabeth N. Simas Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. The Democratic and Republican parties have longstanding reputations for their abilities to competently handle particular issues. These reputations help to simplify voter decision-making. Voters need only to determine which issues are most important in an election, then support the party with the strongest reputation for handling those issues. As elite polarization has grown in recent decades, the parties’ reputations should be even clearer, facilitating their use in vote choice. However, the corresponding partisan polarization in the electorate should limit the breadth of issue ownership beliefs, as well as the impact of these beliefs on vote choice. In this manuscript, we use a novel survey experiment to prime the parties’ owned issues. Our results show that the prime causes a shift in intended vote choice among pure independents, but not among partisans. These findings suggest that polarization has not erased issue ownership, but that partisanship has narrowed its potential impact. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-06-03T10:02:43Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221106435
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Zachary A. Scott, Jared McDonald Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Emotions are an important feature of representation, as they allow politicians to reflect the feelings of their constituents. Yet studies of elites’ use of emotions have been confined to examinations of strategic incentives. We build on these studies by incorporating elites’ group identities as a theoretical consideration. Our theory blends perspectives on the group identities of partisanship, gender, and race with political psychology research on emotions. We hypothesize that Republicans use more fear and disgust language than Democrats, that women candidates use more joy language than men candidates, and that Black candidates use less anger than white candidates. We test these hypotheses by applying emotional sentiment dictionaries to a corpus of primary candidates’ speeches. The evidence supports our claim that Republicans use more fear and that women use more joy, but we find no significant differences in the use of disgust and anger language by partisanship and race, respectively. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-06-02T12:04:02Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221106432
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Michael Barber, Jeremy Pope Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. What factors do people most associate with the partisan identity of others: group identity, political issue positions, or social behaviors' In this research note, we report the results of a conjoint experiment in which we test the predictive power of descriptive identities against other attributes such as social behaviors and issue positions. We find that when presented with a randomized biography to predict partisanship, people rely on issue positions over descriptive group identities or behaviors. Most issues outperform group affiliations and behaviors, with sexual orientation as the partial exception. We then compared these results to the correlation between the same factors in respondents’ own biographies and their own partisan identification. We find that political issues are far less important to people’s own partisan affiliations, while group identity is more predictive. We conclude that an understanding or perception of ideological concepts and their association with the political parties in others should be distinguished from adoption of such concepts by individuals themselves. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-06-01T08:38:36Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221083831
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Daron R. Shaw, Lindsay Dun, Sarah Heise Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Since the early 2000s, an array of experimental research has demonstrated that face-to-face canvassing is the most effective form of get-out-the-vote campaigning. Recent scholarship, however, suggests that text messaging can also have powerful mobilization effects. Can the effects of text messaging match those of canvassing' We present a field experiment gauging the effects of text messaging, canvassing, mail, and phone calls among medium propensity evangelical Christian voters in three California battleground congressional districts for the 2018 midterm election. The results show significant turnout effects associated with texting as well as any form of outreach followed by a late-October text message. This challenges the widely held notion that personalized contacting is required to get voters to the polls; rather, we find that peripheral voters—often targeted by campaigns for mobilization—may be receptive to anonymous but timely outreach. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-05-30T06:31:54Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221094295
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Philip Edward Jones, Amy B. Becker Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. As with public opinion on other policy issues, attitudes toward transgender rights are partly driven by “group-centric” reasoning. Those with more positive feelings toward transgender people are more likely to support policies that protect their rights. But linking group affect with policies impacting members of that group requires some knowledge and understanding of politics, which not all citizens possess to the same extent. In this research note, we demonstrate that political awareness moderates the relationship between affect toward transgender people and support for their civil rights. ANES data from 2016 and 2020 show that more politically sophisticated respondents were more likely to connect their views of transgender people with policies that protect their rights. These results suggest that group-centric thinking is most prevalent among the most, not least, politically aware. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-05-16T10:10:16Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221090488
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Amanda Weiner, Ariel Zellman Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. To what extent do white nationalists influence Congressional representative conservatism' Although ethnocentrism, out-group prejudice, and racial threats strongly predict American political attitudes and voter behavior, how social movements predicated on these beliefs shape political outcomes is rarely considered. We argue that white nationalist activities significantly contribute to the radicalization of Congressional representatives’ policy agendas in a manner non-reducible to demographic or socioeconomic conditions. By mobilizing white voters against racial status threats, they indirectly compel politicians to adopt more radically conservative agendas. We quantitatively test these propositions by examining distributions of white nationalist groups in the American South against Congressional representative conservatism from 2010–2017. Analyses reveal that white nationalists indeed appear to significantly impact representative radical conservatism, even controlling for numerous factors commonly theorized to explain their rise. In doing so, we contribute to emerging insights on the political influence of the radical right on the contemporary American conservative “mainstream.” Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-05-16T10:09:56Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221088844
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Ivelisse Cuevas-Molina, Tatishe M. Nteta, Brian Schaffner, Wouter van Erve Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Does the presence of a Latino congressional candidate increase Latino turnout' An ongoing debate exists regarding the mobilizing effect of Latino candidates on Latino turnout. However, scholars on both sides of this divide have, as of yet, failed to detect the critical role that a Latino candidate’s partisanship may have on Latino turnout. Using national turnout data and leveraging the exogenous shock of redistricting between 2010 and 2012, we find evidence that while the presence of a Latino congressional candidate increases turnout among Latino co-partisans, the presence of Latino congressional candidates who do not share the partisan identity of Latino voters depresses turnout. We conclude by emphasizing the importance of the reinforcing power of shared partisan and pan-ethnic identities in empowering Latinos to vote. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-05-16T10:09:16Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221090753
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print.
Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-05-15T01:36:37Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221101248
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:James J. Fahey, Damon C. Roberts, Stephen M. Utych Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Political scientists have long been interested in the effects that media framings have on support or tolerance for controversial speech. In recent years, the concept of cancel culture has complicated our understanding of free speech. In particular, the modern Republican Party under Donald Trump has made “fighting cancel culture” a cornerstone of its electoral strategy. We expect that when extremist groups invoke cancel culture as a reason for their alleged censorship, support for their free speech rights among Republicans should increase. We use a nationally representative survey experiment to assess whether individuals’ opposition to cancel culture is principled or contingent on the ideological identity of the speaker. We show that framing free speech restrictions as the consequence of cancel culture does not increase support for free speech among Republicans. Further, when left-wing groups utilize the cancel culture framing, Republicans become even less supportive of those groups’ free speech rights. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-04-22T04:31:18Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221087601
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Anna Gunderson Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Conversations around criminal legal reform often center around prosecutorial discretion. Yet, we know little about how the demographic characteristics of prosecutors influence case outcomes and race- and sex-based carceral disparities. I investigate this question using an original dataset of all county prosecutors in the US in 2001 and 2007 and find some differences between non-white and female prosecutors and white and male prosecutors. Black prosecutors are associated with fewer felony closures and convictions, Latinx prosecutors are associated with lower Latinx jail populations, and female prosecutors are associated with lower female and Black jail populations, lower Black prison admissions, and lower jail admissions rates. These findings suggest prosecutorial discretion is an important plank of criminal legal reform, and increasing the diversity of those offices may act as an important and initial step to limit the negative effects of the carceral state on particular communities. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-04-21T05:45:09Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221082638
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:David H. Bearce, Ken Stallman Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. This paper considers a messaging strategy to shift immigration preferences, arguing that if citizen attitudes in this issue-area build from several dimensions, then a positive message related to each dimension should move attitudes in a more favorable direction. It tests the first part using original survey data with directly comparable questions about whether immigration hurts/helps American culture/the economy/national security, providing evidence that all three dimensions currently support the preferences of voting-age citizens. It tests the second part by randomly presenting another sample with different messages about how labor immigration strengthens national security, creates new jobs, or enhances culture, finding that all three reduce anti-immigration attitudes with significant effects even within groups that are more opposed to immigration (namely, white Americans, those with less education, and partisan Republicans). Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-04-05T01:50:42Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221078276
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Miles T. Armaly, Elizabeth A. Lane Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Supreme Court vacancies are now characterized by great partisan efforts to confirm—or impede—the nomination. Amid a politicized vacancy before the 2020 election, there was cause to question the conclusion that these vacancies do not harm the judiciary in the public’s eyes. We utilize panel data collected before and after Justice Ginsburg’s death to investigate the effects of the vacancy and partisan posturing to fill it. We find that the battle over the vacancy yielded decreases in diffuse support among Democrats, particularly among those who read a story about Senate Republicans’ willingness to fill an election-year vacancy after refusing to in 2016. Support for federal judicial elections decreased across survey waves, but only among certain subsets of respondents. Finally, belief that one’s preferred 2020 candidate would nominate the next justice significantly influenced support for curbing. Elected branch politics appear capable of influencing the mass public’s level of support for the Court. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-03-03T12:59:33Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X211064299
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Huchen Liu, Jonathan P. Kastellec Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. We examine the role of former clerks to Supreme Court justices on the Court’s agenda setting process. We find that when a former clerk is the attorney on either a cert petition or an amicus brief, the Court is more likely to hear a case, compared to advocacy by a non-former clerk. To help explain these patterns, we draw on the broader literature on “revolving door” politics. We argue that the most plausible mechanisms are either that former clerks are more effective advocates or that their presence in a case signals its importance to the Court. Alternatively, former clerks may select into cases that the Court is likely to grant. While we cannot definitively disentangle these competing mechanisms, the strong patterns in the data suggest that the importance of the revolving door in judicial politics extends broadly into the domain of agenda setting and is thus worthy of further investigation. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-02-25T01:13:01Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X211070806
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Abby K. Wood, Christopher S. Elmendorf, Douglas M. Spencer, Nicholas G. Napolio Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. This study exploits the introduction of a new type of public financing of elections—campaign finance vouchers—to estimate the effects of neighborhood-level political cross-pressure on citizens’ decisions to participate in low-cost political activities which vary in their publicness: voting (private) and vouchering (public). Does proximity to ideologically divergent neighbors affect one’s use of publicly disclosed campaign finance vouchers' We find that cross-pressured individuals are slightly more likely to use a campaign finance voucher than similarly situated individuals who are ideologically typical for their precinct. We also find evidence that precinct-level cross-pressure does not drive voucher users to shade their voucher donations toward candidates who are ideologically closer the precinct mean. While our study is limited to a relatively liberal city (Seattle), our results replicated across two election cycles in that city, and our methods can easily be extended to future elections. Finally, our findings raise questions about the empirical assumptions that have shaped the development of campaign finance jurisprudence since 1976. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-01-27T09:17:15Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X211067256
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Carlos Algara, Isaac Hale, Cory L. Struthers First page: 443 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Recent work on American presidential elections suggests that voters engage in anticipatory balancing, which occurs when voters split their ticket in order to moderate collective policy outcomes by forcing agreement among institutions controlled by opposing parties. We use the 2021 Georgia U.S. Senate runoffs, which determined whether Democrats would have unified control of the federal government given preceding November victories by President-elect Biden and House Democrats, to evaluate support for anticipatory balancing. Leveraging an original survey of Georgia voters, we find no evidence of balancing within the general electorate and among partisans across differing model specifications. We use qualitative content analysis of voter electoral runoff intentions to support our findings and contextualize the lack of evidence for balancing withan original analysis showing the unprecedented partisan nature of contemporary Senate elections since direct-election began in 1914. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-02-25T08:56:49Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X211070819
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Nathaniel Swigger, Melissa Buelow, James Wirth, Bradley Okdie First page: 464 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Political partisanship stems from the fundamental process of categorizing one’s social world and influences important behavioral outcomes, such information processing. The present study examines the role of political partisanship in risky decision making as assessed with the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), a common ecologically valid behavioral task. Participants (N = 881) were randomly assigned to modified IGT conditions: one in which the advantageous card decks were labeled with the same political affiliation as the participant and one in which the advantageous card decks were labeled with the opposite political affiliation. We demonstrate that partisan heuristics can enhance or inhibit good decision making. We found partisan heuristics enhanced decision making if a partisans’ identity was congruent with clearly advantageous options. However, when the options are more ambiguous, partisan bias interferes with partisans’ ability to make advantageous decisions. Partisan bias has limits though, as partisans reject unambiguously bad options, even if those options carry their party label. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-03-29T03:45:47Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221081252
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Katherine Tate, Mary Arend First page: 479 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Critical mass theories predict that women in government will sponsor and vote for more women and feminist bills as their numbers increase. Using Voteview.com data of roll-call votes measuring left–right ideology from 1977 to 2019 this paper shows that ideological divides among women in the U.S. House of Representatives have deepened rather than veered in a liberal direction. Republican women have moved rightward over time and more conservative ones are winning elections. Belonging to a politicized generation, older Silent Generation and Boomer women are more ideologically extreme than younger women. Parties are also elevating their more ideological female members. As their numbers increase, female House members are expected to remain ideologically diverse in a polarized legislative environment. Critical mass theories are deficient in failing to place female political actors in a dynamic workplace. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-03-25T07:06:12Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221077931
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Jonah B. King First page: 488 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Work in political psychology has found that the two major political parties are sorted based on individual’s group attachments. This sorting has resulted in the Democratic Party’s electorate and elites being made up of members from various racial, religious, and social groups. Given this heterogeneity, how do social group identities impact voter preferences in the Democratic primary' Based on social identity theory, I hypothesize that an individual’s feelings toward racial or gender groups should be associated with their candidate preference in the primary election, but only when a candidate’s group identities are known. Using the 2018 American National Elections Studies (ANES) pilot and a nationally diverse survey of 2020 Democratic primary voters, I find that the strength of sentiments toward racial or gender identities is associated with candidate preference and this association is conditioned by the ability to link the candidates to racial or gender groups. This paper shows that the effects of group identity extend beyond simply sorting individuals into one of the two major parties and have the potential to create group-based divisions within the “big tent” of the Democratic Party. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-03-30T12:49:01Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221081481
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Jordan Butcher First page: 503 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Legislative turnover is indicative of political careerism, district competitiveness, and the strength of the incumbency advantage. Although there are many examinations of legislative turnover in U.S. state legislatures, there has not been an update in nearly 2 decades. One limitation of the existing turnover measures is the inability to distinguish between naturally occurring turnover and the artificial turnover caused by term limits. In this research note, I present an update to legislative turnover from 2002 to 2018 and discuss the importance of using updated data, as well as avenues for future research. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-03-30T11:38:57Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221082319
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:James M. Strickland First page: 511 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Little is known about how legislature size affects the political mobilization of societal interests. I propose that legislative downsizing events increase the cost of campaigns, and thereby spur additional lobbying by organized interests that corral monetary resources efficiently. I examine how numbers of organizations with registered lobbyists changed in response to legislative downsizing events in three states. Using synthetic control analyses, I find that downsizing did not affect organization totals in Massachusetts or Rhode Island, but that Illinois’ Cutback Amendment precipitated a 25-percent increase in organized interests. Further tests disconfirm that monetary-based interests were most likely to mobilize anew after the Amendment’s implementation. In general, these mixed findings imply that changes in legislature size alone are insufficient for affecting interest mobilization but that other kinds of legislative reforms, such as the transition from cumulative to plurality voting that accompanied Illinois’ downsizing, may affect mobilization rates. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-01-27T12:56:31Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X211063214
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Robert Lucas Williams First page: 525 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. How parties manage capitols and constituencies in the American context is the subject of much political inquiry. This research examines whether majority parties’ institutional capability depends on their ability to organize beyond the legislative chamber. An opportunity to examine such a question presents itself in a curious historical occurrence, the Minnesota Legislature’s abrupt de jure ban on political parties. Using data compiled from the Minnesota House of Representatives, I compare partisan characteristics in roll call voting in the context of an experimental setting. The results suggest legislative leadership powers lose efficacy when party’s organizational capacity beyond the chamber diminishes. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-02-01T04:20:09Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X211053629
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Joel Sievert, Victor Hinojosa First page: 539 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Presidents and presidential candidates serve as an important source cue for the mass public’s attitudes toward and evaluations of the political parties. Our study evaluates these dynamics during the transition from a lame duck president, Barack Obama, to a new party standard-bearer, Hillary Clinton. Our analysis takes advantage of the fact that the 2014 and 2016 Cooperative Election Study (CES) and the 2012 and 2016 American National Election Study (ANES) surveys asked respondents to evaluate both Obama, Clinton, and the Democratic Party. These data allow us to examine whether the transition from Obama to Clinton changed the primary referent for public attitudes toward the Democratic Party. Our results provide mixed evidence about a change in the relative importance of attitudes toward Clinton and Obama when the former became the nominee, and the latter was a lame duck. While the public’s view of the connection between Obama and Democratic Party’s ideological profile remained constant across time, respondents did update their affective assessments of the party in the face of a new party leader once Clinton was the nominee. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-02-22T04:22:36Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221076435
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Annelise Russell, Rebecca Eissler First page: 545 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. The president’s agenda-setting ability has a rich research history, with studies most often derived from the State of the Union Address. While a president communicates many of his policy priorities via the public address, the presidential agenda is more complex and variable than can be understood in one speech. Presidents have a number of tools to articulate their priorities, and how we understand presidential agenda-setting is linked to the tool and its intended audience. This research note illustrates the important variation in presidential agendas across venues by comparing the publicized agenda from the State of the Union with the policymaker-focused priorities conveyed in the annual Budget Message. Using the coding scheme of the U.S. Policy Agendas Project to assess presidential agenda setting over more than 35 years, we illustrate the audience-driven variability in presidents’ agendas and highlight how the intended audience reveals presidents’ strategic choices. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-01-27T09:16:15Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221074359
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Adam Cayton First page: 550 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. How do members of Congress respond to economic shocks in their districts' This study uses constituency-level unemployment data from 2006–2011 and data on the policy instruments included in individual bills to estimate the district-level effects of the Great Recession on the kinds of policies individual lawmakers introduce. Few previous studies have examined lawmaker responsiveness to rapid changes in district conditions and fewer still examine policy instruments instead of issue priorities. Measuring instruments matters because they capture what the policy actually does (as opposed to what it is about) which is both consequential and ideologically loaded. The results show that Democrats and Republicans respond differently. Republicans are more responsive, particularly with policy instruments that conform to their ideology, while Democrats are as likely (in the case of tax cuts), or more likely (in the case of spending) to support economic stimulus without an economic crisis. Differences in the macropolitical situation cannot be ruled out as an explanation of the differences between parties. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-03-29T06:56:48Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221077940
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Eric R. Hansen First page: 564 Abstract: American Politics Research, Ahead of Print. Why do some members of Congress vote more on the extremes of their party than others' I argue that lawmakers representing more homogeneously white districts have greater electoral incentive to moderate their voting records, since the two parties compete more for support of white voters than for the support of minority voters. I provide evidence using roll-call votes from the U.S. House and Senate. I find members representing more homogeneously white districts have more moderate voting records, a finding that holds for Democrats and Republicans. I explore two potential mechanisms: legislator responsiveness and electoral punishment. While legislators do not seem to adjust their voting behavior in response to short-term changes in district racial composition, more homogeneously white districts are found to assess larger vote share penalties on more extreme candidates in general elections. The findings have implications for our understanding of race, representation, and electoral accountability. Citation: American Politics Research PubDate: 2022-04-28T02:42:16Z DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221087159
Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
[1174 journals]
