Skip to main content

Partisan Politics and Congressional Election Prospects: Evidence from the Iowa Electronic Markets

  • Joyce E. Berg (a1), Christopher E. Penney (a2) and Thomas A. Rietz (a3)

Using the Iowa Electronic Markets (IEM), this article assesses the political impact of several important events during the fall of 2013: the US government shutdown, the Senate elimination of filibusters for presidential nominations (i.e., the “nuclear option”), and the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (i.e., ObamaCare). Did these events have meaningful effects on congressional control prospects in the 2014 election? According to IEM price changes, Republican chances fell dramatically when the government shut down, and they did not recover on resolution. Eliminating filibusters had a negative impact on Democratic chances. Various aspects of the ObamaCare rollout and reporting, as well as new announcements that incumbents would not run for reelection, had little effect. In contrast, the budget resolution reinforced the status quo. Overall, political rhetoric does not appear to affect congressional control prospects. Instead, actions matter: deliberate partisan actions of Congress adversely affect the initiating party’s prospects, whereas bipartisan initiatives help the party that initiates the bipartisan effort.

Hide All
Abramowitz, Alan I. 1988. “Explaining Senate Election Outcomes.” American Political Science Review 82 (2): 385403.
Berg, Joyce E., and Rietz, Thomas A.. 2012. “Longshots, Overconfidence and Efficiency on the Iowa Electronic Market.” Working Paper, University of Iowa, Henry B. Tippie College of Business.
Berg, Joyce, Forsythe, Robert, Nelson, Forrest, and Rietz, Thomas. 2008. “Results from a Dozen Years of Election Futures Markets Research.” In Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, ed. Plott, Charles R. and Smith, Vernon L., 742–51. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Berg, Joyce E., Nelson, Forrest D., and Rietz, Thomas A.. 2008. “Prediction Market Accuracy in the Long Run.” International Journal of Forecasting 24 (2): 285300.
Bondarenko, Oleg, and Bossaerts, Peter. 2000. “Expectations and Learning in Iowa.” Journal of Banking & Finance 24 (9): 1535–55.
Borch, Karl. 1960. “The Safety Loading of Reinsurance Premiums.” Scandinavian Actuarial Journal 43 (3–4): 163–84.
Lewis-Beck, Michael, and Tien, Charles. 2011. “Election Forecasting.” In The Oxford Handbook of Economic Forecasting, ed. Clements, Michael and Hendry, David, 655–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mann, Thomas E. 2007. “Polarizing the House of Representatives: How Much Does Gerrymandering Matter?” In Red and Blue Nation? Characteristics and Causes of America’s Polarized Politics, Volume 1, ed. Nivola, Pietro S. and Brady, David W., 263–83. Baltimore: Brookings Institution.
Peters, Jeremy W. 2013. “3 House Retirements Complicate Outlook for Midterms.” New York Times, December 18, 2013.
Saltzman, Evan, and Eibner, Christine. 2014. Evaluating the “Keep Your Own Health Plan” Fix. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Stegmaier, Mary, and Norpoth, Helmut. 2013. “Forecasting, Election.” In Oxford Bibliographies in Political Science, ed. Valelly, Rick. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Recommend this journal

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

PS: Political Science & Politics
  • ISSN: 1049-0965
  • EISSN: 1537-5935
  • URL: /core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Berg supplementary material
Online Appendix

 Word (19 KB)
19 KB


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed