Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-8hm5d Total loading time: 0.362 Render date: 2022-05-20T23:17:34.735Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Long-Term Consequences of Election Results

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 July 2015

Abstract

Voters in US elections receive markedly different representation depending on which candidate they elect, and because of incumbent advantages, the effects of this choice persist for many years. What are the long-term consequences of these two phenomena? Combining electoral and legislative roll-call data in a dynamic regression discontinuity design, this study assesses the long-term consequences of election results for representation. Across the US House, the US Senate and state legislatures, the effects of ‘coin-flip’ elections persist for at least a decade in all settings, and for as long as three decades in some. Further results suggest that elected officials do not adapt their roll-call voting to their districts’ preferences over time, and that voters do not systematically respond by replacing incumbents.

Type
Articles
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Harris School of Public Policy Studies, University of Chicago (email: anthony.fowler@uchicago.edu); Department of Political Science, Stanford University (email: andrewbhall@stanford.edu). We thank Steve Ansolabehere, David Broockman, Devin Caughey, Ryan Enos, Andrew Gelman, Gabe Lenz, Michele Margolis, Max Palmer, Jim Snyder, and seminar participants at Chicago, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Ohio State and Pittsburgh for helpful feedback. Data replication sets are available at http://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/BJPolS and online appendices are available at http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0007123415000241.

References

Almond, Douglas, and Doyle, Joseph J.. 2011. After Midnight: A Regression Discontinuity Design in Length of Postpartum Hospital Stays. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 3 (3):134.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Snyder, James M. Jr. 2000. Soft Money, Hard Money, Strong Parties. Columbia Law Review 100 (3):598619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Snyder, James M. Jr. 2002. The Incumbency Advantage in U.S. Elections: An Analysis of State and Federal Offices, 1942–2000. Election Law Journal 1 (3):315338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Snyder, James M. Jr. 2004. Using Term Limits to Estimate Incumbency Advantages When Officeholders Retire Strategically. Legislative Studies Quarterly 29 (4):487515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Snyder, James M. Jr, and Stewart III, Charles. 2000. Old Voters, New Voters, and the Personal Vote: Using Redistricting to Measure the Incumbency Advantage. American Journal of Political Science 44 (1):1734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Snyder, James M. Jr, and Stewart III, Charles. 2001. Candidate Positioning in U.S. House Elections. American Journal of Political Science 45 (1):136159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Jones, Philip Edward. 2010. Constituents’ Responses to Congressional Roll-Call Voting. American Journal of Political Science 54 (3):583597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin, Johnson, Martin, Lindstädt, Rene, and Vander Wielen, Ryan J.. 2015. The Influence of News Media on Political Elites: Investigating Strategic Responsiveness in Congress. American Journal of Political Science (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Bafumi, Joseph, and Herron, Michael C.. 2010. Leapfrog Representation and Extremism: A Study of American Voters and Their Members of Congress. American Political Science Review 104 (3):519542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barreca, Alan, Lindo, Jason M., and Waddell, Glen R.. 2015. Heaping-Induced Bias in Regression Discontinuity Designs. Economic Inquiry (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Barreca, Alan, Guldi, Melanie, Lindo, Jason M., and Waddell, Glen R.. 2011. Saving Babies? Revisiting the Effect of Very Low Birth Weight Classification. Quarterly Journal of Economics 126 (4):21172123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernhardt, M. Daniel, and Ingberman, Daniel E.. 1985. Candidate Reputations and the Incumbency Effect. Journal of Public Economics 27 (1):4767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broockman, David E. 2009. Do Congressional Candidates Have Reverse Coattails? Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Design. Political Analysis 17 (4):418434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Adam R. 2014. Voters Don’t Care Much About Incumbency. Journal of Experimental Political Science 1 (2):132143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burden, Barry C. 2004. Candidate Positioning in US Congressional Elections. British Journal of Political Science 34:211227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burden, Barry C., Caldeira, Gregory A., and Groseclose, Tim. 2000. Measuring Ideologies of US Senators: The Song Remains the Same. Legislative Studies Quarterly 25 (2):237258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, Daniel M., and Butler, Matthew J.. 2006. Splitting the Difference? Causal Inference and Theories of Split-Party Delegations. Political Analysis 14 (4):439455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cain, Bruce E., Ferejohn, John A., and Fiorina, Morris P.. 1984. The Constituency Service Basis of the Personal Vote for U.S. Representatives and British Members of Parliament. American Political Science Review 78 (1):110125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E.. 1960. The American Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Canes-Wrone, Brandice, Brady, David W., and Cogan, John F.. 2002. Out of Step, Out of Office: Electoral Accountability and House Members’ Voting. American Political Science Review 96 (1):127140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, Jamie L., Kroger, Gregory, Lebo, Matthew J., and Young, Everett. 2010. The Electoral Costs of Party Loyalty in Congress. American Journal of Political Science 54 (3):598616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughey, Devin, and Sekhon, Jasjeet S.. 2011. Elections and the Regression Discontinuity Design: Lessons from Close U.S. House Races, 1942–2008. Political Analysis 19:385408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinton, Joshua D., and Enamorado, Ted. 2014. The National News Media’s Effect on Congress: How Fox News Affected Elites in Congress. Journal of Politics 76 (4):928943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinton, Joshua, Jackman, Simon, and Rivers, Douglas. 2004. The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data. American Political Science Review 98 (2):355370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and Poole, Keith T.. 2002. On Measuring Partisanship in Roll-Call Voting: The U.S. House of Representatives, 1877–1999. American Journal of Political Science 46 (3):477489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Keeter, Scott. 1997. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
De Magalhaes, Leandro. 2015. Incumbency Effects in a Comparative Perspective: Evidence from Brazilian Mayoral Elections. Political Analysis 23 (1):113126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper Press.Google Scholar
Eggers, Andrew C., and Spirling, Arthur. 2014a. Party Cohesion in Westminster Systems: Inducements, Replacement, and Discipline in the House of Commons, 1836–1910. British Journal of Political Science (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Eggers, Andrew C., and Spirling, Arthur. 2014b. A Framework for Interpreting Party Incumbency Effects with Application to the United Kingdom, 1832–2001, Nuffield College, Oxford, UK Working Paper.Google Scholar
Eggers, Andrew C., Folke, Olle, Fowler, Anthony, Hainmueller, Jens, Hall, Andrew B., and Snyder, James M. Jr. 2015. On the Validity of the Regression Discontinuity Design for Estimating Electoral Effects: New Evidence from Over 40,000 Close Races. American Journal of Political Science 59 (1):259274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elis, Roy, Malhotra, Neil, and Meredith, Marc. 2009. Apportionment Cycles as Natural Experiments. Political Analysis 17 (4):358376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S. 1971. The Advantage of Incumbency in Congressional Elections. Polity 3 (3):395405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1977. Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fouirnaies, Alexander, and Hall, Andrew B.. 2014. The Financial Incumbency Advantage: Causes and Consequences. Journal of Politics 76 (3):711724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Anthony, and Hall, Andrew B.. 2012. Conservative Vote Probabilities: An Easier Method for Summarizing Roll-Call Data. Working paper. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Fowler, Anthony, and Hall, Andrew B.. 2014a. Disentangling the Personal and Partisan Incumbency Advantages: Evidence from Close Elections and Term Limits. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 9 (4):501531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Anthony, and Hall, Andrew B.. 2014b. The Elusive Quest for Convergence. Working paper. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Fowler, Anthony, and Hall, Andrew B.. 2015. Congressional Seniority and Pork: A Pig Fat Myth? Working paper. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1990. Estimating Incumbency Advantage Without Bias. American Journal of Political Science 34 (4):11421164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and Huang, Zaiying. 2008. Estimating Incumbency Advantage and Its Variation, as an Example of a Before-After Study. Journal of the American Statistical Association 103 (482):437451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald, Palmquist, Bradley, and Schickler, Eric. 2002. Partisan Hearts and Minds. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Andrew B. 2015. What Happens When Extremists Win Primaries? American Political Science Review 109 (1):1842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heckman, James J., and Snyder, James M. Jr. 1997. Linear Probability Models of the Demand for Attributes with an Empirical Application to Estimating the Preferences of Legislators. RAND Journal of Economics 28:142189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbing, John R. 1991. Congressional Careers: Contours of Life in the U.S. House of Representatives. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Hirano, Shigeo, and Snyder, James M. Jr. 2009. Using Multimember District Elections to Estimate the Sources of the Incumbency Advantage. American Journal of Political Science 53 (2):292306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hix, Simon, Noury, Abdul, and Roland, Gerard. 2006. Dimensions of Politics in the European Parliament. American Journal of Political Science 50 (2):494520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotelling, Harold. 1929. Stability in Competition. Economic Journal 39:4157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, Guido W., and Lemieux, Thomas. 2008. Regression Discontinuity Designs: A Guide to Practice. Journal of Econometrics 142 (2):615635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1987. The Marginals Never Vanished: Incumbency and Competition in Elections to the U.S. House of Representatives, 1952–82. American Journal of Political Science 31 (1):126141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 2009. The Politics of Congressional Elections, 7th Edition. New York: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary. 2014. It’s Nothing Personal: The Decline of the Incumbency Advantage in House Elections. MPSA 2014 Annual Meeting Paper, 3 April, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1993. Incumbency and the News Media in U.S. Senate Elections: An Experimental Investigation. Political Research Quarterly 46 (4):715740.Google Scholar
Kam, Cindy D., and Zechmeister, Elizabeth J.. 2013. Name Recognition and Candidate Support. American Journal of Political Science 57 (4):971986.Google Scholar
Klein, David, and Baum, Lawrence. 2001. Ballot Information and Voting Decisions in Judicial Research. Political Research Quarterly 54 (4):709728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith. 1993. Where’s the Party? British Journal of Political Science 23 (2):235266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, David S. 2008. Randomized Experiments from Non-Random Selection in U.S. House Elections. Journal of Econometrics 142 (2):675697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, David S., Moretti, Enrico, and Butler, Matthew J.. 2004. Do Voters Affect or Elect Policies? Evidence from the U.S. House. Quarterly Journal of Economics 119 (3):807859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenz, Gabriel S. 2013. Follow the Leader? How Voters Respond to Politicians’ Policies and Performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Levitt, Steven D., and Wolfram, Catherine. 1997. Decomposing the Sources of Incumbency Advantage in the U.S. House. Legislative Studies Quarterly 22 (1):4560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindstädt, René, and Vander Wielen, Ryan J.. 2014. Dynamic Elite Partisanship: Party Loyalty and Agenda Setting in the U.S. House. British Journal of Political Science 44 (4):741772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magee, Christopher S.P., and Wolaver, Amy M.. 2005. Policy Divergence in Races for the U.S. House of Representatives. Social Science Quarterly 86 (3):565581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 1974. Congressional Elections: The Case of the Vanishing Marginals. Polity 6 (3):295317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2001. The Hunt for Party Discipline in Congress. American Political Science Review 95 (3):673687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2006. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2009. Does Gerrymandering Cause Polarization? American Journal of Political Science 53 (3):666680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgenstern, Scott. 2004. Patterns of Legislative Politics: Roll-Call Voting in Latin America and the United States. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1985. A Spatial Model for Legislative Roll Call Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 29 (2):357384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, Howard, and Voeten, Erik. 2004. Analyzing Roll Calls with Perfect Spatial Voting: France 1946-1958. American Journal of Political Science 48 (3):620632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, James M. Jr., and Groseclose, Tim. 2000. Estimating Party Influence in Congressional Roll-Call Voting. American Journal of Political Science 44 (2):193211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, Jason. 2005. Detecting Manipulation in U.S. House Elections, working paper. Berkeley: Haas School of Business, University of California.Google Scholar
Squire, Peverill. 1988. Career Opportunities and Membership Stability in Legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly 13 (1):6582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tausanovitch, Chris, and Warshaw, Christopher. 2012. Measuring Constituent Policy Preferences in Congress, State Legislatures, and Cities. Journal of Politics 75 (2):330342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thistlethwaite, Donald L., and Campbell, Donald T.. 1960. Regression-Discontinuity Analysis: An Alternative to the Ex Post Facto Experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology 51 (6):309317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uppal, Yogesh. 2009. The Disadvantaged Incumbents: Estimating Incumbency Effects in Indian State Legislatures. Public Choice 138 (1–2):927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Fowler and Hall Dataset

Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Fowler and Hall supplementary material S1

Appendix

Download Fowler and Hall supplementary material S1(PDF)
PDF 274 KB
9
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Long-Term Consequences of Election Results
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Long-Term Consequences of Election Results
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Long-Term Consequences of Election Results
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *