2002
DOI: 10.1017/s0003055402000229
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Influence of Party: Evidence from the State Legislatures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
117
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 170 publications
(124 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
(52 reference statements)
6
117
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Somewhat surprisingly, the previous literature has not taken advantage of this unique research design, neglecting the effects of electoral institutions on particularism. Several recent works take advantage of the proliferation of online voting records and sophisticated webscraping techniques have reduced the costs of collecting comprehensive state-level data (Clark et al 2009;Shor et al 2010), but those focus on the effects of legislator demographic characteristics on bill initiation and policy success (Bratton and Haynie 1999;Whitby 2002) or the role of parties in state legislatures (Battista and Richman 2011;Jenkins 2008;Wright and Schaffner 2002). Examining a sample of 165,000 bills spanning 120 years in 13 different states, Gamm and Kousser (2010) identified a considerable amount of particularistic legislation and found that particularistic legislation was related to the level of party competition in the legislature, with one party dominance associated with more particularistic bills, and members' salaries (with higher compensation associated with more particularistic bills).…”
Section: Electoral Institutions and The Personal Votementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Somewhat surprisingly, the previous literature has not taken advantage of this unique research design, neglecting the effects of electoral institutions on particularism. Several recent works take advantage of the proliferation of online voting records and sophisticated webscraping techniques have reduced the costs of collecting comprehensive state-level data (Clark et al 2009;Shor et al 2010), but those focus on the effects of legislator demographic characteristics on bill initiation and policy success (Bratton and Haynie 1999;Whitby 2002) or the role of parties in state legislatures (Battista and Richman 2011;Jenkins 2008;Wright and Schaffner 2002). Examining a sample of 165,000 bills spanning 120 years in 13 different states, Gamm and Kousser (2010) identified a considerable amount of particularistic legislation and found that particularistic legislation was related to the level of party competition in the legislature, with one party dominance associated with more particularistic bills, and members' salaries (with higher compensation associated with more particularistic bills).…”
Section: Electoral Institutions and The Personal Votementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, estimates from roll call analysis can be used to test theories of legislative behavior. For instance, roll call analysis has been used in studies of the U.S. Congress, both contemporary and historical (e.g., Canes-Wrone, Brady, and Cogan 2002;Jenkins 1999;Schickler 2000), state legislatures (e.g., Wright and Schaffner 2002), courts (Martin and Quinn 2001), comparative politics (Londregan 2000b), and international relations (Voeten 2000). In short, roll call analysis make conjectures about legislative behavior amenable to quantitative analysis, helping make the study of legislative politics an empirically grounded, cumulative body of scientific knowledge.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They may allow for candidates to run in multiple party primaries, as California did in the first half of the twentieth century. In many cases, these reforms have their desired effect; legislative partisanship is virtually nonexistent in Nebraska (Wright and Schaffner 2002) and was substantially reduced in the early-twentieth-century California legislature (Masket 2007). Sometimes, however, parties find ways around these obstacles.…”
Section: Parties In Hostile Environmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%