Ideology and Representation in the US Senate: Roll Calls v. Constituent Assessments

Gershtenson, Joseph; Plane, Dennis L.

doi:10.1080/13572330701663637

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar measurement technique has been used in several recent studies to evaluate the ideological distance between citizens and members of Congress (Griffin and Flavin 2007;Newman 2007, 2008;Ellis 2012Ellis , 2013, Senators (Gershtenson and Plane 2007), and presidential candidates (Burden 2004;Jessee 2009) in the United States as well as the ideological distance between citizens and political parties in Europe (Blais and Bodet 2006;Powell 2009;Golder and Stramski 2010;Giger, Rosset, and Bernauer 2012). To illustrate, Figure 1 compares two hypothetical citizens, Citizen A and Citizen B, who both live in the same state.…”

Section: Flavinmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Evaluating ideological proximity requires a method of placing citizens' opinions and state policy on a common scale for comparison (Achen 1978;Burden 2004;Blais and Bodet 2006;Gershtenson and Plane 2007;Griffin and Flavin 2007;Griffin and Newman 2008;Jessee 2009;Powell 2009;Golder and Stramski 2010;Ellis 2012Ellis , 2013Giger, Rosset, and Bernauer 2012). This article approaches the task by standardizing all citizens' ideological self-placements and the two measures of general state policy liberalism described above (Gray et al 2004;Sorens et al 2008) to a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one.…”

Section: Flavinmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

State Campaign Finance Laws and the Equality of Political Representation

FlavinPatrick¹

2014

Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laws that regulate the financing of campaigns are one attempt to attenuate the role of money in politics in hopes that citizens' opinions will receive more equal consideration when elected officials make policy decisions. Do states with stricter campaign finance laws actually display more egalitarian patterns of representation? Using public opinion measures from the National Annenberg Election Surveys and data on state policies, I first demonstrate that state policy decisions are consistently more proximate to the opinions of citizens with higher incomes. I then evaluate the relationship between the strictness of state campaign finance laws and political equality and find evidence that states with more stringent campaign finance disclosure requirements weigh citizens' opinions more equally in the policymaking process. However, I find no statistical relationship between the strictness of contribution limits or the presence of a public financing system and the equality of political representation.

show abstract

Section: Flavinmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Flavinmentioning

confidence: 98%

State Campaign Finance Laws and the Equality of Political Representation

FlavinPatrick¹

2014

Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 Using this method, as the ideological distance between a citizen's opinion and policy grows (i.e., policy is ideologically "further" from a citizen's preferences), that citizen is not well represented. A substantively similar measurement technique has been used in several recent studies to evaluate the ideological distance between citizens and Member of Congress (Ellis, 2012(Ellis, , 2013Griffin & Flavin, 2007;Griffin & Newman, 2007, 2008, Senators (Gershtenson & Plane, 2007), and presidential candidates (Burden, 2004;Jessee, 2009) in the United States as well as the ideological distance between citizens and political parties in Europe (Blais & Bodet, 2006;Giger, Rosset, & Bernauer, 2012;Golder & Stramski, 2010;G. B. Powell, 2009).…”

Section: Evaluating the Equality Of Political Representation In The Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Lobbying Regulations and Political Equality in the American States

Flavin

2014

American Politics Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laws that regulate the conduct of professional lobbyists in statehouses across the nation are one attempt to ensure that citizens' opinions receive more equal consideration when elected officials make policy decisions. Do states with stricter lobbying regulations actually display more egalitarian patterns of political representation? Using public opinion measures from the National Annenberg Election Surveys and data on state policies, this article first demonstrates that state policy decisions are consistently more proximate to the opinions of affluent citizens. I then evaluate the relationship between the stringency of state lobbying regulations and representational equality across the states and find evidence that states with stricter regulations weigh citizens' opinions more equally in the policymaking process. These findings suggest that lobbying regulations can play an important role in promoting greater political equality.There is growing concern among social scientists, policymakers, and the general public about unequal political influence and its consequences for eco-

show abstract

“…Measuring ideological proximity requires a method of placing citizens’ opinions and state policy on a common scale for comparison. Drawing on previous studies that have also used a proximity technique to measure political representation (Achen, ; Burden, ; Blais and Bodet, ; Gershtenson and Plane, ; Griffin and Flavin, ; Griffin and Newman, ; Jessee, ; Golder and Stramski, ; Ellis, ; Giger, Rosset, and Bernauer, ), this article approaches this task in three different ways. If all three measurement techniques point to the same conclusion, then we can be more confident in the robustness of the results…”

Section: Evaluating the Equality Of Political Representation In The Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The identical measurement technique has been used in several recent studies to evaluate the ideological distance between citizens and members of Congress (Griffin and Flavin, ; Griffin and Newman, ; Ellis, ), senators (Gershtenson and Plane, ), and presidential candidates (Burden, ; Jessee, ) in the United States as well as the ideological distance between citizens and political parties in Europe (Blais and Bodet, ; Golder and Stramski, ; Giger, Rosset, and Bernauer, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Direct Democracy and Political Equality in the American States*

Flavin

2014

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. This study investigates the relationship between direct democracy and the equality of opinion-policy representation in the American states. Methods. Using public opinion measures from the National Annenberg Election Surveys and data on state policy outputs, I generate an index of the equality of political representation (based on citizens' incomes) that is comparable across the states. I then evaluate the relationship between different measures of direct democracy and political equality. Results. States with the ballot initiative process are no more politically equal than states without the process. However, among those that have the ballot initiative process, states where it is easier to place a measure on the ballot for popular vote and states where the ballot initiative is more frequently used tend to weigh citizens' opinions more equally in the policy-making process. Conclusion. These findings suggest that having and frequently using direct democracy leads to more egalitarian policy outcomes. More generally, this study underscores the importance of laws and institutional design in promoting political equality in the United States.

show abstract

Ideology and Representation in the US Senate: Roll Calls v. Constituent Assessments

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

State Campaign Finance Laws and the Equality of Political Representation

State Campaign Finance Laws and the Equality of Political Representation

Lobbying Regulations and Political Equality in the American States

Direct Democracy and Political Equality in the American States*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About