Dancing with the One Who Brought You: The Allocation and Impact of Party Giving to State Legislators

Schecter, David L.; Hedge, David M.

doi:10.2307/440331

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Those victories have been neither cheap nor easy. In capturing the state's lower chamber in 1996 for the first time since Reconstruction, Republicans poured $1.1 million into 60 closely watched races, an amount that was easily surpassed by Democrats who spent nearly $2 million dollars in those same contests in the hopes of maintaining their slim majority (Schecter and Hedge 2001). As important as party monies were, those monies represented only a portion (albeit a significant one) of the parties' efforts in 1996 and earlier in the decade.…”

Section: Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An interesting aspect of this debate became the changing partisan nature of many states revisiting the abortion issue, some for the first time since before the days of Roe v. Wade (1973). In the former solid "Democratic South," for example, this partisan change was particularly pronounced as a number of state legislatures changed from Democratic to Republican control in the 1990s (Schecter and Hedge 2001). In addition, since 1980 the Democratic and Republican parties began to take noticeably different stands on the abortion issue.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This suggests, as well, that legislators are in a constant balancing act concerning constituent influences, private influences, and how they perceive their own roles as state representatives. Since a number of states now have new parties in control of so many aspects of a legislator's life (Schecter and Hedge 2001), are parties and personal concerns more relevant influences than constituent concerns in how a legislator might vote on issues such as abortion?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What Drives the Voting on Abortion Policy? Investigating Partisanship and Religion in the State Legislative Arena

Schecter

2001

Women & Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much of the public policy debate on abortion now centers in the nation's state capitals. This research assesses the impact of partisanship and religiosity on the voting behavior of state legislators. Recent research indicates that a legislator's religious affiliation and the religiosity of their home districts can be a powerful predictor of votes on abortion bills, but this research uses a unique data set developed to analyze voting in the Florida House of Representatives to re-test those ideas and test several new ones. This work challenges the notion that member religion or district religiosity is more influential than partisanship in predicting votes on abortion. Ordered probit techniques show partisanship, gender and legislator religion (for Catholic and Jewish members only), to be the most significant predictors of abortion voting behavior. A number of district characteristics are found to be less significant. Theoretically, this suggests that legislators fulfill their party obligations as trustee on the floor of the House, more so than following constituent interests in the classic delegate role, as originally noted by Burke.A noticeable tug-of-war concerning abortion has been taking place in a number of state capitals since the U.S. Supreme Court gave more leeway to the states to deal with the topic in the Webster v. Reproductive

show abstract

Section: Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Drives the Voting on Abortion Policy? Investigating Partisanship and Religion in the State Legislative Arena

Schecter

2001

Women & Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Party loyalty has often been seen as a potential predictor of party contributions (Leyden and Borrelli 1990), although others have failed to find such patterns (Schecter and Hedge 2001). Other studies have examined campaign professionalism (Francia et al 2003;Herrnson 1989), seniority (Stonecash 1988;Stonecash and Keith 1996), and leadership positions (Thompson and Cassie 1992) as predictors of receiving a contribution.…”

Section: Offense Defense Theory (Odt)mentioning

confidence: 96%

The Redistricting Cycle, Partisan Tides, and Party Strategy in State Legislative Elections

Makse

2014

State Politics Policy Q.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

State legislative elections are increasingly shaped by two factors that influence the prospects of winning a majority: the redistricting cycle and partisan tide elections. Winning control of the redistricting process offers the prospect of shaping elections for the next decade, making majority status significantly more valuable than it otherwise might be. Partisan tides, on the contrary, can dramatically alter perceptions of which seats are safe or vulnerable and of whether majority status is obtainable or not. In this article, I examine how the proximity of redistricting and the presence of partisan tides are reflected in the strategies of the party organizations that contest state legislative elections. Using party finance data from 29 states during the period from 1996 to 2010, I find that parties' majority-seeking behavior is more intense in states with legislative redistricting, when redistricting is imminent, and when partisan tides favor the minority party.

show abstract

“…In spite of the centrifugal forces of localism, institutionalized by single-member districts, national party organizations in the United States persistently attempt to manage candidate recruitment (Jacobson 1985-86;Kazee and Thornberry 1990). Likewise, party organizations at national, state, and local levels actively raise and disperse funds to enhance their preferred candidates' electoral prospects (Herrnson 1989;Damore and Hansford 1999;Ansolabehere and Snyder 2000;Schecter and Hedge 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parties in Elections, Parties in Government, and Partisan Bias

Krehbiel¹,

Meirowitz²,

Römer

2005

Polit. anal.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political parties are active when citizens choose among candidates in elections and when winning candidates choose among policy alternatives in government. But the inextricably linked institutions, incentives, and behavior that determine these multistage choices are substantively complex and analytically unwieldy, particularly if modeled explicitly and considered in total, from citizen preferences through government outcomes. To strike a balance between complexity and tractability, we modify standard spatial models of electoral competition and governmental policy-making to study how components of partisanship—such as candidate platform separation in elections, party ID-based voting, national partisan tides, and party-disciplined behavior in the legislature—are related to policy outcomes. We define partisan bias as the distance between the following two points in a conventional choice space: the ideal point of the median voter in the median legislative district and the policy outcome selected by the elected legislature. The study reveals that none of the party-in-electorate conditions is capable of producing partisan bias independently. Specified combinations of conditions, however, can significantly increase the bias and/or the variance of policy outcomes, sometimes in subtle ways.

show abstract

Dancing with the One Who Brought You: The Allocation and Impact of Party Giving to State Legislators

Cited by 8 publications

References 6 publications

What Drives the Voting on Abortion Policy? Investigating Partisanship and Religion in the State Legislative Arena

What Drives the Voting on Abortion Policy? Investigating Partisanship and Religion in the State Legislative Arena

The Redistricting Cycle, Partisan Tides, and Party Strategy in State Legislative Elections

Parties in Elections, Parties in Government, and Partisan Bias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About