1 Downs, Anthony, An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York: Harper, 1957).
2 Though see Key, V. O. Jr., The Responsible Electorate (Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, 1966).
3 Kerr, W. A., “A Quantitative Study of Political Behavior, 1840–1940”, Journal of Social Psychology, 19 (1944), 273–281.
4 Pearson, F. A. and Myers, W. I., “Prices and Presidents”, Farm Economics (Ithaca, N.Y.: New York State College of Agriculture, Cornell University), 163 (September 1948), 4210–4218, at p. 4210.
5 Bean, Louis H., Ballot Behavior (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Public Affairs, 1940), p. 63n.
6 Wilkinson, T. and Hart, H., “Prosperity and Political Victory”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 14 (1950), 331–335, at pp. 332, 334.
8 Tibbits, Clark, “Majority Votes and the Business Cycle”, American Journal of Sociology, 36 (1931) 596–606.
9 Gosnell, H. F. and Coleman, W. G., “Politica Trends in Industrial America: Pennsylvania as an Example”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 4 (1940), 473–484, at p. 475.
10 Ogburn, W. F. and Coombs, L. C., “The Economic Factor in the Roosevelt Elections”, this REVIEW, 34 (1940), 719–736, at pp. 719–720.
12 Rees, Albert, Kaufman, H., Eldersveld, S. J., and Freidel, F., “The Effect of Economic Conditions on Congressional Elections, 1946–58”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 44 (1962), 458–465.
13 Clark, Wesley C., Economic Aspects of a Presidents Popularity (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1943).
14 Durant, Henry, “Indirect Influences on Voting Behavior”, Polls, 1 (1965), 3–11.
15 Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E., The American Voter (New York: Wiley, 1960), pp. 381–440.
16 For discussion of the identification problem in a somewhat different context, see Koopmans, Tjalling C., “Identification Problems in Economic Model Construction”, in Hood, W. C. and Koopmans, T. C. (eds.), Studies in Econometric Method (New York: Wiley, 1953).
17 Stokes, Donald E. and Miller, Warren E., “Party Government and the Saliency of Congress”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 26 (1962).
19 Stokes, Donald E., “A Variance Components Model of Political Effects”, in Bernd, J. L. (ed.), Mathematical Applications in Political Science (Dallas, Tex.: Southern Methodist University Press, 1965).
20 It would also be natural to add a third disturbance, say z., to represent the net effect of the personal characteristics of individual congressional candidates. However, as we have already noted, congressional candidates are relatively anonymous to most of their constituents, and congressional campaign efforts are typically much less extensive than those of either statewide or local races; furthermore, this “personal” effect would be averaged over some 400-odd individual races, so the final net effect would be smalt indeed. Hence we shall ignore it.
23 Cummings, Milton C. Jr., Congressmen and the Electorate (New York: The Free Press, 1966), pp. 135ff.
24 The other parameter estimates are close to those reported in Table 1, though the goodness of fit is somewhat poorer.
26 See Freeman, Harold, Introduction to Statistical Inference (Reading, Pa.: Addison-Wesley, 1963), pp. 69ff; and Mood, A. M. and Graybill, F. A., Introduction to the Theory of Statistics (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963), pp. 220ff.
27 See Freeman, op. cit., pp. 253c; and Mood and Graybill, op. cit. pp. 178ff.
28 See Freeman, op. cit., pp. 300ff; and Mood and Graybill, op. cit., pp. 297ff.