Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:24:26.633Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Responsible Congressional Electorate: Watergate, the Economy, and Vote Choice in 1974

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Eric M. Uslaner  and
M. Margaret Conway
Eric M. Uslaner
Affiliation:
University of Maryland —College Park
M. Margaret Conway
Affiliation:
University of Maryland —College Park
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Most analyses of the 1974 congressional elections have failed to find significant effects for either Watergate or personal financial conditions, despite the prominence of both of these issues in the campaign. An alternative thesis argues that the effect was indirect, through the selection of better-than-usual Democratic candidates and weaker Republican contestants for House seats. Reanalyzing campaign finance data, we challenge this thesis and then move on to a different type of analysis from that which traditionally has been done in retrospective voting studies. With the use of the 1972-1974 panel of the Center for Political Studies, we examine separately the voting behavior of what V. O. Key, Jr. called “standpatters” and “switchers.” The former are motivated primarily by party identification, with small Watergate effects. Our probit analylsis for switchers, on the other hand, finds much weaker party identification effects, but, interestingly, much more pronounced Watergate and economic impacts. Furthermore, an analysis of the sample compared to the population of districts in 1974 suggests that a more representative sample would lead to even more pronounced impacts for Watergate and the economy than even we have found.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 79 , Issue 3 , September 1985 , pp. 788 - 803
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1985

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.)

References

Aldrich, J., & Cnudde, C. Probing the bounds of conventional wisdom: A comparison of regression, probit and discriminant analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 1975, 19, 571–608.10.2307/2110547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, R. A. Stability and change in party identification: Presidential to off-years. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, September, 1977.Google Scholar
Cannon, L. GOP left with White House—but Democrats are cautious about celebrating, Washington Post, November 6, 1974, A1, A10.Google Scholar
Congressional Quarterly. The House: More than two-thirds Democratic. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, November 16, 1974, 3065–3066. (a)Google Scholar
Congressional Quarterly. Suburbs and the South: Democratic gold mines, Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, November 16, 1974, 3122–3123. (b)Google Scholar
Conway, M. M., & Wyckoff, M. L. Voter choice in the congressional elections. American Politics Quarterly, 1980, 5, 3–14.10.1177/1532673X8000800101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eubank, R. B., & Gow, D. J. The pro-incumbent bias in the 1978 and 1980 national election studies. American Journal of Political Science, 1983, 27, 122–139.10.2307/2111056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrar, D. E., & Glauber, R. R. Multicollinearity: The problem revisited. Review of Economics and Statistics, 1967, 49, 92–107.10.2307/1937887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, M. P. The case of the vanishing marginals: The bureaucracy did it. American Political Science Review, 1977, 71, 177–181.10.2307/1956961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, M. P. Retrospective voting in American Elections. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Gow, D. J., & Eubank, R. B. The pro-incumbent bias in the 1982 national election study. American Journal of Political Science, 1984, 25, 224–230.10.2307/2110795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granat, D. Whatever happened to the Watergate babies? Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, March 3, 1984, 498–505.Google Scholar
Hinckley, B. The American voter in congressional elections. American Political Science Review, 1980, 74, 641–650.10.2307/1958147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, G. C. Money in congressional elections. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Jacobson, G. C. The politics of congressional elections. Boston: Little Brown, 1983.Google Scholar
Jacobson, G. C., & Kernell, S. Strategy and choice in congressional elections. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Key, V. O. Jr. The responsible electorate. New York: Vintage Books, 1966.10.4159/harvard.9780674497764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewiet, D. R. Macroeconomics and micropolitics: The electoral effects of economic issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.Google Scholar
Kinder, D. R., & Kiewiet, D. R. Economic discontent and political behavior: The role of personal grievances and collective economic judgments in congressional voting. American Journal of Political Science, 1979, 23, 495–527.10.2307/2111027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, G. H. The ecological fallacy revisited: Aggregate- versus individual-level findings on economics and elections and sociotropic voting. American Political Science Review, 1983, 77, 92–111.10.2307/1956013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, T. E., & Wolfinger, R. E. Candidates and parties in congressional elections. American Political Science Review, 1980, 74, 617–632.10.2307/1958145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod, J. M., Brown, J. D., & Becker, L. B. Watergate and the 1974 congressional elections. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1977, 41, 181–195.10.1086/268373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, A. H. Political issues and trust in government: 1964-1970. American Political Science Review, 1974, 68, 951–972.10.2307/1959140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, A. H., & Glass, R. Economic dissatisfaction and electoral choice. Unpublished mimeo, Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan, 1977.Google Scholar
New York Times. In the region, wall to wall Democrats, November 10, 1974, Section 4, 1.Google Scholar
Owens, J. R., & Olson, E. C. Economic fluctuations and congressional elections. American Journal of Political Science, 1980, 24, 469–493.10.2307/2110828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragsdale, L., & Cook, T. Representatives' actions and challengers' reactions: Limits to candidate connections in the House. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April, 1984.Google Scholar
Tufte, E. R. Political control of the economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978.10.1515/9780691219417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weatherford, M. S. Economic conditions and electoral outcomes: Class differences in the political response to recession. American Journal of Political Science, 1978, 22, 917–938.10.2307/2110599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfinger, R. E., & Rosenstone, S. Who votes? New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Wright, G. C. Constituency response to congressional behavior: The impact of the House Judiciary Committee impeachment votes. Western Political Quarterly, 1977, 30, 401–410.10.1177/106591297703000310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.