Skip to main content
×
Home

Does Government Support Respond to Governments’ Social Welfare Rhetoric or their Spending? An Analysis of Government Support in Britain, Spain and the United States

Abstract

Issue ownership theory posits that when social welfare is electorally salient, left-wing parties gain public support by rhetorically emphasizing social welfare issues. There is less research, however, on whether left-wing governing parties benefit from increasing social welfare spending. That is, it is not known whether leftist governments gain from acting on the issues they rhetorically emphasize. This article presents arguments that voters will not react to governments’ social welfare rhetoric, and reviews the conflicting arguments about how government support responds to social welfare spending. It then reports time-series, cross-sectional analyses of data on government support, governments’ social welfare rhetoric and social welfare spending from Britain, Spain and the United States, that support the prediction that government rhetoric has no effects. The article estimates, however, that increased social welfare spending sharply depresses support for both left- and right-wing governments. These findings highlight a strategic dilemma for left-wing governments, which lose public support when they act on their social welfare rhetoric by increasing welfare spending.

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

School of History, Politics and International Relations, University of Leicester (email: lb350@le.ac.uk); Department of Political Science, University of California, Davis (email: jfadams@ucdavis.edu). The research presented in this article was supported by a Starting Grant of the European Research Council (Grant No. 284277) to the ResponsiveGov Project (http://www.responsivegov.eu/). The authors are grateful for this funding. Earlier versions of this article were presented at the Elections, Public Opinion and Parties Conference in Cardiff, 11–13 September 2015 and at the meeting of the Parties, Participation and Public Opinion research cluster, Department of Politics, University of Leicester, 11 November 2015. We are thankful for the feedback received from the participants of these events, in particular Laura Morales, Francesco Visconti, Oriol Sabaté, Daniela Vintila, Angeliki Konstantinidou, Rick Whitaker and Shane Martin. We thank Will Jennings for kindly sharing the data on vote intentions in the UK and the three anonymous reviewers for positively welcoming the article and giving great comments that improved the manuscript substantively. Replication data sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at: https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.7910/DVN/JXSIV0 and online appendices are available at https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0007123417000199.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Adams James. 2016. On the Relationship between (Parties’ and Voters’) Issue Attention and Issue Positions: Response to Dowding, Hindmoor, and Martin. Journal of Public Policy 36 (1):2531.
Adams James, Ezrow Lawrence, and Somer-Topcu Zeynep. 2011. Is Anybody Listening? Evidence That Voters Do Not Respond to European Parties’ Policy Statements During Elections. American Journal of Political Science 55 (2):370382.
Adams James, Ezrow Lawrence, and Somer-Topcu Zeynep. 2014. Do Voters Respond to Party Manifestos or to a Wider Informational Environment? An Analysis of Mass-Elite Linkages on European Integration. American Journal of Political Science 58 (4):967978.
Adams James, Clark Michael, Ezrow Lawrence, and Glasgow Garrett. 2006. Are Niche Parties Fundamentally Different from Mainstream Parties? The Causes and Electoral Consequences of Western European Parties’ Policy Shifts, 1976–98. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3):513529.
Alt James E. 1979. The Politics of Economic Decline: Economic Management and Political Behaviour in Britain since 1964. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bara Judith. 2005. A Question of Trust: Implementing Party Manifestos. Parliamentary Affairs 58:585599.
Barnett Adrian, van der Pouls Jolieke, and Dobson Annette. 2005. Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it. International Journal of Epidemiology 34 (1):215220.
Bartels Larry. 2002. Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions. Political Behaviour 24 (2):117150.
Baumgartner Frank, Breunig Christian, Green-Pedersen Christoffer, Jones Bryan, Mortensen Peter, Nuytemans Michiel, and Walgrave Stefaan. 2009. Punctuated Equilibrium in Comparative Perspective. American Journal of Political Science 53 (5):603620.
Beck Nathaniel, and Katz Jonathan N.. 1995. What To Do (and Not To Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data. The American Political Science Review 89 (3):634647.
Beck Nathaniel, and Katz Jonathan N.. 2011. Modeling Dynamics in Time-Series–Cross-Section Political Economy Data. Annual Review of Political Science 14:331352.
Bernardi Luca, and James Adams. 2017. “Replication Data for: Does Government Support Respond to Governments’ Social Welfare Rhetoric or their Spending? An Analysis of Government Support in Britain, Spain and the United States”, https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.7910/DVN/JXSIV0, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:fCPuRsHG9HLG0FuU2L1aYA==.
Bevan Shaun, John Peter, and Jennings Will. 2011. Keeping Party Programmes on Track: The Transmission of the Policy Agendas of Executive Speeches to Legislative Outputs in the United Kingdom. European Political Science Review 3 (3):395417.
Bevan Shaun, and Jennings Will. 2014. Representation, Agendas and Institutions. European Journal of Political Research 53 (1):3756.
Budge Ian, and Farlie Dennis J.. 1983. Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-three Democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.
Budge Ian, Klingemann Hans-Dieter, Volkens Andrea, Bara Judith, and Tanenbaum Eric. 2001. Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties. Electors, and Governments, 194598 . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chaqués Bonafont Laura, Palau Anna M., and Muñoz Marquez Luz M.. 2014. Policy Promises and Governmental Activities in Spain. In Agenda Setting, Policies, and Political Systems. A Comparative Approach , edited by Christoffer Green-Pedersen and Stefaan Walgrave 183200. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Dalton Russel J. 2013. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Societies. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
De Boef Suzanna, and Keele Luke. 2008. Taking Time Seriously. American Journal of Political Science 52 (1):184200.
Duch Raymond M., and Stevenson Randolph T.. 2008. The Economic Vote. How Political and Economic Institutions Condition Election Results. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Edwards George C. IIIand Wood B. Dan. 1999. Who Influences Whom? The President, Congress, and the Media. The American Political Science Review 93:327344.
Epp Derek A, Lovett John, and Baumgartner Frank R.. 2014. Partisan Priorities and Public Budgeting. Political Research Quarterly 67:864878.
Esping-Andersen Gosta. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ezrow Lawrence. 2005. Are Moderate Parties Rewarded in Multiparty Systems? A Pooled Analysis of Western European Elections, 1984–98. European Journal of Political Research 44 (6):881898.
Fernandez-Vazquez Pablo. 2014a. And Yet It Moves: The Effect of Election Platforms on Party Policy Images. Comparative Political Studies 47 (14):19191944.
Fernandez-Vazquez Pablo. 2014b. Signalling Policy Positions in Election Campaigns. Typescript.
Fernandez-Vazquez Pablo, and Somer-Topcu Zeynep, Forthcoming. The Information Consequences of Party Leader Changes for Voter Perceptions of Party Positions. British Journal of Political Science.
Fortunato David, and Stevenson Randolph T.. 2013. Perceptions of Partisan Ideologies: The Effect of Coalition Participation. American Journal of Political Science 57 (2):459477.
Green Jane, and Hobolt Sara B.. 2008. Owning the Issue Agenda: Party Strategies and Vote Choices in British Elections. Electoral Studies 27:460476.
Green Jane, and Jennings Will. 2012. Valence as Macro-Competence: An Analysis of Mood in Party Competence Evaluations in Great Britain. British Journal of Political Science 42 (2):311343.
Green Jane, and Jennings Will. 2014. Explaining Costs of Governing. Paper Prepared for Presentation at the ECPR General Conference, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 3–6 September.
Green-Pedersen Christoffer, and Walgrave Stefaan, eds. 2014. Agenda Setting, Policies, and Political Systems: A Comparative Approach. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Green-Pedersen Christoffer, Mortensen Peter B., and So Florence. 2015. Power by What? Coalition Dynamics and the Prime Minister Party’s Agenda-Setting. Typescript.
Hobolt Sara B., and Klemmensen Robert. 2008. Government Responsiveness and Political Competition in Comparative Perspective. Comparative Political Studies 41 (3):309337.
Hobolt Sara, Klemmensen Robert, and Pickup Mark. 2009. The Dynamics of Issue Diversity in Party Rhetoric. Typescript.
Jennings Will, and John Peter. 2009. The Dynamics of Political Attention: Public Opinion and the Queen’s Speech in the United Kingdom. American Journal of Political Science 53:838854.
Jennings Will, Bevan Shaun, and John Peter. 2011. The Agenda of British Government: The Speech from the Throne, 1911–2008. Political Studies 59 (1):7498.
Jones Bryan D., and Baumgartner Frank R.. 2005. The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Karreth Johannes, Polk Jonathan T., and Allen Christopher S.. 2013. Catchall or Catch and Release? The Electoral Consequences of Social Democratic Parties’ March to the Middle in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies 46:791822.
Kernell Samuel. 1978. Explaining Presidential Popularity. American Political Science Review 72:506522.
Kitschelt Herbert. 1994. The Transformation of European Social Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lacy Dean, and Paolino Philip. 1998. Downsian Voting and the Separation of Powers. American Journal of Political Science 24 (4):11801199.
Paldam Martin. 1991. How Robust is the Vote Function?: A Study of Seventeen Nations over Four Decades. In Economics and Politics: The Calculus of Support, edited by Helmut Norpoth, Michael S. Lewis-Beck and Jean-Dominique Lafay, 931. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Palmer Harvey D., and Whitten Guy D.. 2000. Government Competence, Economic Performance and Endogenous Election Dates. Electoral Studies 19 (2–3):413426.
Petrocik John R. 1996. Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study. American Journal of Political Science 40 (3):825850.
Pickup Mark, and Evans Geoffrey. 2013. Addressing the Endogeneity of Economic Evaluations in Models of Political Choice. Public Opinion Quarterly 77:735754.
Powell G. Bingham, and Whitten Guy D.. 1993. A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context. American Journal of Political Science 37 (2):391414.
Przeworski Adam, and Sprague John. 1986. Paper Stones: A History of Electoral Socialism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Rose Richard, and Mackie Thomas T.. 1983. Incumbency in Government: Asset or Liability? In Western European Party Systems. Continuity & Change, edited by Hans Daalder and Peter Mair, 115137. London: Sage.
Schumacher Gijs, Vis Barbara, and van Kersbergen Kees. 2013. Political Parties’ Welfare Image, Electoral Punishment and Welfare State Retrenchment. Comparative European Politics 11 (1):121.
Scruggs Lyle. 2007. The Generosity of Social Insurance, 1971–2002. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 22 (3):349364.
Scruggs Lyle, Jahn Detlef, and Kuitto Kati. 2014. Comparative Welfare Entitlements Data Set 2, Version 2014‐03. Available from http://cwed2.org/, accessed 30 April 2016.
Sigelman Lee, and Kathleen Knight. 1983. Why Does Presidential Popularity Decline? A Test of the Expectation/Disillusion Theory. The Public Opinion Quarterly 47 (3):310324.
Soroka Stuart N., and Wlezien Christopher. 2010. Degrees of Democracy: Politics, Public Opinion, and Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shugart Matthew, and Carey John. 1992. Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Stimson James A. 1976. Public Support for American Presidents: A Cyclical Model. Public Opinion Quarterly 40 (1):121.
Strom Kaare. 1990. A Behavioural Theory of Competitive Political Parties. American Journal of Political Science 34 (2):565598.
Tufte Richard E. 1975. Determinants of the Outcomes of Midterm Congressional Elections. American Political Science Review 69 (3):812826.
van der Brug Wouter, van der Eijk Cees, and Franklin Mark. 2007. The Economy and the Vote. Economic Conditions and Elections in Fifteen Countries. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wagner Markus, and Meyer Thomas M.. 2014. Which Issues do Parties Emphasise? Salience Strategies and Party Organisation in Multiparty Systems. West European Politics (June): 127.
Wlezien Christopher, Jennings Will, Fisher Stephen, Ford Robert, and Pickup Mark. 2013. Polls and the Vote in Britain. Political Studies 61:6691.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

British Journal of Political Science
  • ISSN: 0007-1234
  • EISSN: 1469-2112
  • URL: /core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary Materials

Bernardi and Adams supplementary material
Bernardi and Adams supplementary material 1

 PDF (566 KB)
566 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary Materials

Bernardi and Adams supplementary material
Dataset

 Unknown

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 29 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 265 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 8th November 2017 - 23rd November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.