Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T00:18:29.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constituency Opinion and Congressional Policy Making: The Reagan Defense Buildup

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Larry M. Bartels
Larry M. Bartels
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Rrepresentatives' votes on a series of defense budget roll calls in the first year of the Reagan administration's Pentagon buildup are related to constituency opinions on defense spending during the 1980 election campaign. The strong aggregate constituency demand for increased defense spending in 1980 is estimated to have added almost $17 billion (about 10%) to the total fiscal year 1982 Pentagon appropriation. The impact of constituency opinion was largely independent of specific political circumstances: differential responsiveness in districts with partisan turnover, intense districtlevel competition, and strong presidential coattails together accounted for less than $1 billion in additional appropriations, with the remaining $16 billion attributable to across-the-board responsiveness by even the most safely incumbent representatives.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 85 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 457 - 474
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1991

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

Achen, Christopher H. 1978. “Measuring Representation.” American Journal of Political Science 22:475–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, John H., Sullivan, John L., and Borgida, Eugene. 1989. “Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates ‘Waltz Before a Blind Audience?’” American Political Science Review 83:123–41.Google Scholar
Barone, Michael, and Ujifusa, Grant. 1981. The Almanac of American Politics 1982. Washington: Barone.Google Scholar
Brady, David W. 1988. Critical Elections and Congressional Policy Making. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Congressional Quarterly. 1980. Congressional Quarterly Almanac 1980. Washington: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Congressional Quarterly. 1981. Congressional Quarterly Almanac 1981. Washington: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E., and Pierce, Roy. 1986. Political Representation in France. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S. 1978. “Constituency Opinion and Congressional Behavior: A Reexamination of the Miller-Stokes Representation Data.” American Journal of Political Science 22:511–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. Jr. 1973. Congressmen in Committees. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. Jr. 1978. Homestyle: House Members in Their Districts. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, John A., and Calvert, Randall L. 1984. “Presidential Coattails in Historical Perspective.” American Journal of Political Science 28:127–46.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris. 1974. Representatives, Roll Calls, and Constituencies. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.Google Scholar
Fowler, Linda L., and Shaiko, Ronald G. 1987. “The Grass Roots Connection: Environmental Activists and Senate Roll Calls.” American Journal of Political Science 31:484–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1990. “Estimating Incumbency Advantage Without Bias.” Occasional Paper 90–1. Harvard University. Center for American Political Studies.Google Scholar
Jackson, John E. 1974. Constituencies and Leaders in Congress: Their Effects on Senate Voting Behavior. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, John E., and King, David C. 1989. “Public Goods, Private Interests, and Representation.” American Political Science Review 83:1143–64.Google Scholar
Kingdon, John W. 1981. Congressmen's Voting Decisions. 2d ed.New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith, and Rivers, Douglas. 1988. “The Analysis of Committee Power: An Application to Senate Voting on the Minimum Wage.” American Journal of Political Science 32:1151–74.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 1974. “Congressional Elections: The Case of the Vanishing Marginals.” Polity 6:295–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E., and Shanks, J. Merrill. 1982. “Policy Directions and Presidential Leadership: Alternative Interpretations of the 1980 Presidential Election.” British Journal of Political Science 12:299–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E. 1963. “Constituency Influence in Congress.” American Political Science Review 57:45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neustadt, Richard E. 1960. Presidential Power: The Politics of Leadership. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Niemi, Richard G., Mueller, John, and Smith, Tom W. 1989. Trends in Public Opinion: A Compendium of Survey Data. New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Ornstein, Norman J., Mann, Thomas E., and Malbin, Michael J. 1990. Vital Statistics on Congress 1989–1990. Washington: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Rivers, Douglas. N.d. “Partisan Representation in Congress.” University of California, Los Angeles. Typescript.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, Lawrence S. 1989. “Do Interest Groups Make a Difference? Lobbying, Constituency Influence, and Public Policy.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E. E. 1942. Party Government. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1950. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. 3d ed.New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of Census. 1987. Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1987 (107th ed.). Washington: Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.