scholarly journals Legislators’ roll-call voting behavior increasingly corresponds to intervals in the political spectrum

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Schoch ◽  
Ulrik Brandes
Keyword(s):  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Dimensional Space ◽  
Political Orientation ◽  
Interval Order ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Roll Call Voting ◽  
One Dimensional ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Political Spectrum ◽  
Low Dimensional

Abstract Scaling techniques such as the well known NOMINATE position political actors in a low dimensional space to represent the similarity or dissimilarity of their political orientation based on roll-call voting patterns. Starting from the same kind of data we propose an alternative, discrete, representation that replaces positions (points and distances) with niches (boxes and overlap). In the one-dimensional case, this corresponds to replacing the left-to-right ordering of points on the real line with an interval order. As it turns out, this seemingly simplistic one-dimensional model is sufficient to represent the similarity of roll-call votes by U.S. senators in recent years. In a historic context, however, low dimensionality represents the exception which stands in contrast to what is suggested by scaling techniques.

scholarly journals Public Opinion and Public Policy in Advanced Democracies

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Wlezien
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Descriptive Representation ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
The Public ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
The Government

The representation of public opinion in public policy is of obvious importance in representative democracies. While public opinion is important in all political systems, it is especially true where voters elect politicians; after all, opinion representation is a primary justification for representative democracy. Not surprisingly, a lot of research addresses the connection between the public and the government. Much of the work considers “descriptive representation”—whether the partisan and demographic characteristics of elected politicians match the characteristics of the electorate itself. This descriptive representation is important but may not produce actual “substantive representation” of preferences in policy. Other work examines the positions of policymakers. Some of this research assesses the roll call voting behavior of politicians and institutions. The expressed positions and voting behavior of political actors do relate to policy but are not the same things. Fortunately, a good amount of research analyzes policy. With but a handful of exceptions noted below, this research focuses on expressed preferences of the public, not their “interests.” That is, virtually all scholars let people be the judges of their own interests, and they assess the representation of expressed opinion no matter how contrary to self-interest it may seem.

Polarization and Ideology: Partisan Sources of Low Dimensionality in Scaled Roll Call Analyses

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 435-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Aldrich ◽  
Jacob M. Montgomery ◽  
David B. Sparks
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Monte Carlo Simulations ◽  
Dimensional Space ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Policy Space ◽  
Policy Conflict ◽  
Party Polarization ◽  
Misleading Evidence ◽  
Low Dimensionality ◽  
Low Dimensional

In this article, we challenge the conclusion that the preferences of members of Congress are best represented as existing in a low-dimensional space. We conduct Monte Carlo simulations altering assumptions regarding the dimensionality and distribution of member preferences and scale the resulting roll call matrices. Our simulations show that party polarization generates misleading evidence in favor of low dimensionality. This suggests that the increasing levels of party polarization in recent Congresses may have produced false evidence in favor of a low-dimensional policy space. However, we show that focusing more narrowly on each party caucus in isolation can help researchers discern the true dimensionality of the policy space in the context of significant party polarization. We re-examine the historical roll call record and find evidence suggesting that the low dimensionality of the contemporary Congress may reflect party polarization rather than changes in the dimensionality of policy conflict.

scholarly journals Gender and Roll Call Voting Behavior in Congress: A Cross-Chamber Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Frederick
Keyword(s):  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Institutional Context ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Roll Call Voting ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Common Space ◽  
Female Legislators ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Male House

Numerous studies have examined the roll call voting behavior of women in Congress. Much of this scholarship has focused on whether female legislators tend to be more liberal than their male colleagues. However, most of this research has examined whether gender differences exist within a specific legislative chamber. This paper seeks to build on this past research by exploring whether the relationship between the descriptive and substantive representation of women is contingent upon the institutional context in which female legislators serve. Using Common Space Scores which estimate the roll call voting behavior of U.S. Senators and U.S. House members on a scale that allows for comparisons across each chamber this study analyzes the voting records of Female Senators, Male Senators, Female House Members and Male House Members in the 109th-111th Congresses. The results show that in the contemporary Congress, gender exerts minimal influence on how legislators cast their votes with the exception of female Republican Senators who are noticeably more liberal than Republicans in both the House and Senate.

The Role of Personal Attributes in African American Roll-Call Voting Behavior in Congress

2008 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 408-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Rocca ◽  
Gabriel R. Sanchez ◽  
Ron Nikora
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Personal Attributes ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Roll Call Voting

Roll-call Voting Behaviour in Legislatures

2020 ◽  
pp. 135-154
Author(s):  
Simon Hug
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Voting Behaviour ◽  
Important Research ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Time And Space ◽  
Roll Call Voting ◽  
Members Of Parliament ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Individual Accountability

Roll call votes offer rich behavioural information on individual members of parliament (MPs) and have been used to study many important research questions, also dealing with issues of representation. With the help of such votes MPs (and/or their parties) can be held to account. Thus, scholars have assessed broadly whether political parties act in a disciplined fashion and what affects the voting behavior of individual MPs, thus covering both processes of collective and individual accountability. The literature finds that evidence for such accountability relationships, is, however, also hampered by different uses of roll call votes across time and space.

German Parliamentarism in 1848: Roll-Call Voting in the Frankfurt Assembly

1981 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 469-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald J. Mattheisen
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Political Support ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Roll Call Voting ◽  
Party Discipline ◽  
Partial Revision ◽  
Government Coalition

The reputation of the Frankfurt Assembly of 1848 has undergone a partial revision in the last few years. Its members used to be considered political novices from whom one could learn little about how to run a parliament (Huber, 1960: 613 is typical). Ziebura (1963) was perhaps the first to challenge this view. He showed that the Frankfurt Assembly was, in fact, run in a very professional way: It created sophisticated and disciplined political parties, and these parties actually exerted effective control over parliamentary business. They even joined together to form a coalition that gave reliable political support to a German provisional government. Kramer (1968), Boldt (1971), Botzenhart (1977), and Langewiesche (1978) have subsequently documented the skillful organization of these parties and their attempts to control members, to create extraparliamentary connections, and to maintain both a formal government coalition and an organized opposition. Kramer (1968: 175-178) has shown that they were particularly successful in applying party discipline to voting behavior: The results of voting could often be foretold simply from a knowledge of how the parties stood on the question at issue.

Politicians' Beliefs about Voters

1967 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Kingdon
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Implicit Theory ◽  
Legislative Behavior ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Close Attention ◽  
Roll Call Voting ◽  
Campaign Strategies ◽  
Central Concern ◽  
Lewis A

The pattern of communications between representatives and constituents has become a matter of central concern to many students of legislative behavior. As Lewis A. Dexter points out, the statement that a Congressman “represents” his district is only shorthand for the fact that the Congressman “represents his image of the district or of his constituents.” This image is established, according to Dexter, by the communications between representative and constituents: “what he hears from the district as he interprets it.” Miller and Stokes explore directly Congressmen's images of their constituents' opinions. The representative's image of his district is significant because it may constitute part of the explanation for various important types of behavior, such as his roll call voting, the stands he takes on issues of public policy, and the formulation of his campaign strategies.A portion of a representative's image of his district is composed of his beliefs about voters, his explicit or implicit theory of voting behavior. Because his position is contingent upon the approval of a majority of voters in an election, he is likely to consider at least to some degree the effect that various of his decisions might have on election outcomes. In making such judgments, the representative probably makes some assumptions, conscious or not, about the manner in which voters make their choices. If he believes, for example, that voters pay close attention to his actions, he probably feels more constrained by his district's likely opinions than if he does not hold that belief.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document