Economic Expectations and Voting Behavior in United States House and Senate Elections

Abstract

Past individual-level studies of economic voting (1) have incorrectly operationalized the model they employ by using past-oriented rather than future-oriented questions and (2) have failed to examine the level of economic voting in United States Senate elections. Using the 1978 National Election Study, we show that economic voting exists in Senate but not House elections, presumably due to the differences in electoral context. Even when economic voting occurs, however, there is no guarantee that the public will influence the direction of macroeconomic policy.

Revisiting residential self-selection issues: A life-oriented approach

“…Among the limited number of studies, Zhang et al (2004), Kuwano et al (2011), andWang et al (2010) investigated the impacts of future expectations on travel mode choice and vehicle type choice based on a dynamic generalized extreme value (DGEV) model proposed by (Swait et al, 2000). On the other hand, it has been relatively long recognized in other disciplines (e.g., psychology and economics) that people's numerous behaviors are forward looking (e.g., Kuklinski and West, 1981;Manski, 1999;Carvajal et al, 2000;Chan and Stevens, 2004;Khan and Dhar, 2007;Van der Klaauw and Wolpin, 2008;Van der Klaauw, 2012). Unrevealed issues include how far people look forward in deciding their current behavior, how people form their expectations toward future behavior, whether future expectations are stable over time or not, how reliable are people's reporting about future expectations, etc.…”

American voter to economic voter: Evolution of an idea

“…From this point, the prospective-retrospective controversy took off. As well, the unqualified phrase, "economic voting" officially entered the literature with its appearance in this Kuklinski and West (1981) paper. Curiously, they nowhere cite TAV, in any form.…”

“…Kuklinski and West (1981) took the prospective argument a step farther, asserting that survey studies of the economic vote should employ future-oriented rather than past-oriented items. From this point, the prospective-retrospective controversy took off.…”

Red Scare? Revisiting Joe McCarthy’s Influence on 1950s Elections

“…The first is the change in year-to-year partisan tides. These arise from numerous sources, but especially from the incumbent president's popularity and the national economy (Hibbing and Alford 1982;Lewis-Beck and Rice 1985;Wright and Berkman 1986;Abramowitz and Segal 1986;Waterman 1990;Cohen, Krassa, and Hamman 1991;Shields, Goidel and Tadlock 1995 1981;2006;Adams and Squire 1997;Bardwell and Lewis-Beck 2004;Born 1991;Carson 2005;Copeland 1989;Erikson 1990;Franklin 1991;1993;Gerber 1998;Gomez and Wilson 2003;Grofman, Brunell, and Koetzle 1998;Hibbing and Brandes 1983;Highton 2004;Hill 1997;Jacobson 2005;Kahn and Kenny 1997;Kahn 1991;Kuklinski and West 1981;Miller 1990;Ragsdale and Rusk 1995;Segura and Nicholson 1995;Squire 1991;1992;Tufte 1975;Westlye 1983. our analysis (though analyses that include the South are essentially the same as those presented here [ Table 2 about here]…”