Election Marginality, District Homogeneity, and Policy Responsiveness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.1992.13.0.341-353Abstract
This research addresses the question of what factors influence policy responsiveness by members of Congress. Data from the 95th and 96th sessions of Congress and the 1978 American National Election Study are employed to test two possible influences on policy responsiveness. First, a revised test of the marginality hypothesis is offered. Instead of looking at marginality statically, the change in both policy responsiveness and marginality is examined. This dynamic model receives no support from the data. Second, the hypothesis that a homogenous opinion structure within the district encourages greater policy responsiveness finds modest support.References
Achen, Christopher H. 1977. Measuring Representation: The Perils of the Correlation Coefficient. American Journal o f Political Science 21: 805-815.
Anderson, Lee F., Meredith W. Watts, and Allen R. Wilcox. 1966. Legislative Roll-Call Analysis. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Asher, Herbert B. and Herbert F. Weisberg. 1978. Voting Change in Congress: Some Dynamic Perspectives on an Evolutionary Process. American Journal of Political Science 22: 391-425.
Barone, Michael, Grant Ujifusa, and Douglas Matthews. 1981. The Almanac o f American Politics, 1982. New York: E.P. Dutton.
Bernstein, Robert A. 1989. Elections, Representation, and Congressional Voting Behavior: The Myth of Constituency Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Clausen, Aage. 1973. How Congressmen Decide: A Policy Focus. New York: St. Martin's.
Collie, Melissa P. 1981. Incumbency, Electoral Safety, and Turnover in the House of Representatives, 1952-1976. American Political Science Review 75: 119-131.
Covington, Cary. 1988.Building Presidential Coalitions Among Cross-Pressured Members of Congress. Western Political Quarterly 41: 47-62.
Deckard, Barbara Sinclair. 1976. Electoral Marginality and Party Loyalty in House Roll- Call Voting. American Journal of Political Science 20: 469-481.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
Edwards, George C. 1980. Presidential Influence in Congress. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman & Company.
Erikson, Robert S. 1978. Constituency Opinion and Congressional Behavior: A Reexamination of the Miller-Stokes Representation Data. American Journal of Political Science 22: 511-535.
________ . 1981. Measuring Constituency Opinion: The 1978 Congressional Survey. Legislative Studies Quarterly 6: 235-245.
________ and Gerald C. Wright. 1980. Policy Representation of Constituency Interests. Political Behavior 2:91-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00989757
Eulau, Heinz and Paul D. Karps. 1978. The Puzzle of Representation: Specifying Components of Responsiveness. In Heinz Eulau and John Wahlke, eds., The Politics of Representation. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Fenno, Richard F. 1978. Home Style. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.
Fiorina, Morris P. 1974. Representatives, Roll Calls, and Constituencies. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
________ .1977. Congress: Keystone o f the Washington Establishment. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Froman, Lewis. 1963. Congressmen and Their Constituencies. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Glazer, Amihai and Marc Robbins. 1985. Congressional Responsiveness to Constituency Change. American Journal of Political Science 29: 259-273.
Jacobson, Gary. 1987. The Politics of Congressional Elections. Boston: Little, Brown.
_______ . 1987b. The Marginals Never Vanished. American Journal of Political Science 31: 126-141.
Jewell, Malcolm and Gerhard Loewenberg. 1979. Editors' Introduction: Toward a New Model of Legislative Representation. Legislative Studies Quarterly 4:485^98.
Kingdon, John W. 1981. Congressmen's Voting Decisions. New York: Harper & Row.
Kuklinski, James H. 1977a. District Competitiveness and Legislative Roll-Call Behavior: A Reassessment of the Marginality Hypothesis. American Journal of Political Science 21: 627-638.
_______ . 1977b. Constituency Opinion: A Test of a Surrogate Model. Public Opinion Quarterly 41: 34-40.
Ladha, Krishna K. 1991. A Spatial Model of Legislative Voting with Perceptual Error. Public Choice 68: 151-174.
Mann, Thomas. 1977. Unsafe at any Margin. Washington DC: American Enterprise Institute.
Miller, Warren E. 1964. Majority Rule and the Representative System of Government. In Erik Allardt and Yrjo Littunen, eds., Cleavages, Ideologies and Party Systems. Helsinki: The Academic Bookstore.
_______ and Donald E. Stokes. 1963. Constituency Influence in Congress. American Political Science Review 57: 45-56.
O'Brien, Lawrence F. 1974. No Final Victories. New York: Doubleday & Company.
Poole, Keith and Howard Rosenthal. 1985. A Spatial Model for Legislative Roll Call Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 29: 357-384.
Shannon, Wayne. 1966. Constituency and Congressional Voting. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.
Uslaner, Eric M. and Ronald E. Weber. 1977. Patterns of Decision Making in State Legislatures. New York: Praeger.
Weber, Ronald E., Anne H. Hopkins, Michael Mezey, and Frank J. Munger. 1972. Computer Simulation of State Electorates. Public Opinion Quarterly 36: 549- 565.
Weissberg, Robert. 1979. Assessing Legislator-Constituency Policy Agreement. Legislative Studies Quarterly 4: 605-622.
Wildavsky, Aaron. 1984. The Politics of the Budgetary Process. Boston: Little, Brown.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
