Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T02:44:09.493Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward A Political Explanation of Government Vote Losses in Midterm By-Elections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Anthony Mughan
Anthony Mughan*
Affiliation:
Australian National University University College Cardiff
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

By-elections in parliamentary democracies are remarkable for the almost invariable loss of support experienced by governments relative to the preceding general election. There has been, however, surprisingly little research into this phenomenon. Using Britain as a test case, this article goes some way towards filling this gap. It identifies and tests three political explanations of governments' by-election vote losses, which it labels the turnout, referendum and personal vote models. No simple conclusion emerges, since different results are obtained depending on whether the models are treated as separate entities or their interplay is taken into account by integrating them into a single causal model. This latter strategy is argued to involve a superior conceptualization of the processes at work in bringing about governments' midterm vote losses.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 80 , Issue 3 , September 1986 , pp. 761 - 775
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1986

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

Alderman, Robert K., and Cross, John A.. 1975. The Prime Minister and the Decision to Dissolve. Parliamentary Affairs, 28:386–404.Google Scholar
Alford, Robert R. 1963. Party and Society: Class and Voting in the Anglo-American Democracies. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Australian Electoral Office, 1983. Commonwealth By-Elections 1901–82. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
Boston, Jonathan. 1980. By-Elections in New Zealand: An Overview. Political Science, 32:103–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, David. 1949. Trends in British By-Elections. Journal of Politics, 11:396–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, David. 1973. By-Elections and Their Interpretation. In Cook, Chris and Ramsden, John, eds., By-Elections in British Politics. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Butler, David, and Kavanagh, Denis. 1981. The British General Election of 1979. London: Macmillan.Google 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, 78:110–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Angus. 1966. Surge and Decline: A Study of Electoral Change. In Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E., Elections and the Political Order. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Denver, David T., and Hands, Gordon. 1974. Marginality and Turnout in British General Elections. British Journal of Political Science, 4: 17–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanushek, Eric A., and Jackson, John E.. 1977. Statistical Methods for Social Scientists. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hinckley, Barbara. 1967. Interpreting House Mid-term Elections: Toward a Measurement of the In-Party's “Expected” Loss of Seats. American Political Science Review, 61:694–700.Google Scholar
Hudson, John. 1985. The Relationship Between Government Popularity and Approval for the Government's Record in the United Kingdom. British Journal of Political Science, 15:165–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husbands, Christopher T. 1985. Government Popularity and the Unemployment Issue. Sociology, 19:1–18.Google Scholar
Inter-Parliamentary Union. 1976. Parliaments of the World. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Jennings, Ivor. 1961. Party Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kay, Barry J. 1981. By-Elections as Indicators of Canadian Voting. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 14:37–52.Google Scholar
Kernell, Samuel. 1977. Presidential Popularity and Negative Voting: An Alternative Explanation of the Midterm Congressional Decline of the President's Party. American Political Science Review, 71:44–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kernell, Samuel, and Hibbs, Douglas A.. 1981. A Critical Threshold Model of Presidential Popularity. In Hibbs, Douglas A. and Fassbender, Hans, eds., Contemporary Political Economy. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
King, Anthony. March 21, 1968. Why All Governments Lose By-Elections. New Society, 11:286.Google Scholar
Mughan, Anthony. 1986. Party and Participation in British Parliamentary Elections. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Norton, Philip. 1975. Dissent in the House of Commons, 1945–1974. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ostrom, Charles W. Jr., and Simon, Dennis M.. 1985. Promise and Performance: A Dynamic Model of Presidential Popularity. American Political Science Review, 79:334–58.Google Scholar
Paldam, Martin. 1981. A Preliminary Survey of the Theories and Findings of Popularity Functions. European Journal of Political Research, 9: 181–99.Google Scholar
Pollock, James K. 1941. British By-Elections Between the Wars. American Political Science Review, 35:519–28.Google Scholar
Powell, G. Bingham Jr., 1980. Voting Turnout in Thirty Democracies: Partisan, Legal and Socio-Economic Influences. In Rose, Richard, ed., Electoral Participation. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rose, Richard, and McAllister, Ian. 1986. Voters Begin to Choose: From Closed-Class to Open Elections in Britain. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Scarrow, Howard A. 1961. By-Elections and Public Opinion in Canada. Public Opinion Quarterly, 25:79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigelman, Lee. 1981. Special Elections to the U.S. House: Some Descriptive Generalizations. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 4:577–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sparks, John C. 1940. British By-Elections: What Do They Prove? American Political Science Review, 34:97–104.Google Scholar
Stokes, Donald E. 1967. Parties and the Nationalization of Electoral Forces. In Chambers, William N. and Burnham, Walter D., eds., The American Party Systems: Stages of Political Development. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stray, Stephanie, and Silver, Mick. 1982. The Measurement of Change in the Popularity of Governments in United Kingdom By-Elections. Political Methodology, 8:93–106.Google Scholar
Stray, Stephanie, and Silver, Mick. 1983. Government Popularity, By-Elections and Cycles. Parliamentary Affairs, 36:49–55.Google Scholar
Taylor, Stan, and Payne, Clive. 1973. Features of Electoral Behaviour at By-Elections. In Cook, Chris and Ramsden, John, eds., By-Elections in British Politics. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Tufte, Edward R. 1975. Determinants of the Outcomes of Midterm Congressional Elections. American Political Science Review, 69:812–26.Google Scholar
Webb, Norman, and Wybrow, Robert, eds. 1981. The Gallup Report 1980. London: Sphere.Google Scholar
Webb, Norman, and Wybrow, Robert, eds. 1982. The Gallup Report 1981. London: Sphere.Google Scholar
Whiteley, Paul. 1984. Inflation, Unemployment and Government Popularity—Dynamic Models for the United States, Britain and West Germany. Electoral Studies, 3:3–24.Google Scholar
Williams, Philip M. 1966–1967. Two Notes on the British Electoral System. Parliamentary Affairs, 20:13–30.Google Scholar
Wood, David. March 28, 1969. Spirit of the Labour Party Tortured by Events. The Times.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.