Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-44mx8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-14T15:59:12.281Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Change We Can Believe In? Using Political Science toPredict Policy Change in the Obama Presidency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2009

Jonathan Woon
Jonathan Woon
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Based on the results of the 2008 presidential and congressionalelections, an analysis using theories and methods of modernpolitical science (pivotal politics theory, ideal point estimates,and bootstrap simulations) suggests that the conditions are ripe forreal policy change. Specifically, we should expect policies to movesignificantly in a liberal direction, few or no policies should movein a conservative direction, and many of the outcomes will bemoderate or somewhat to the left of center (rather than far left).Furthermore, the predictions depend as much on partisan polarizationand the results of the congressional election as they do on theoutcome of presidential election itself.

Type
Features
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 329 - 333
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 2009

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adler, E. Scott. 2000. “Constituency Characteristics and the ‘Guardian’ Model of Appropriations Subcommittees, 1959–1998.” American Journal of Political Science 44 (1): 101–1410.2307/2669296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Snyder, James M. Jr., and Stewart, Charles III. 2001. “Candidate Positioning in U.S. House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (1): 136–59.10.2307/2669364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, David W., and Volden, Craig. 1997. Revolving Gridlock: Politics and Policy from Carter to Clinton. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, Royce, Lewis, Jeff, Lo, James, McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith, and Rosenthal, Howard. 2008. “Common Space DW-NOMINATE Scores with Bootstrapped Standard Errors (Joint House and Senate Scaling).” http://voteview.com/dwnomin_joint_house_and_senate.htm.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the U.S. House of Representatives. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groseclose, Tim. 1994. “Testing Committee Composition Hypotheses for the U.S. Congress.” Journal of Politics 56 (2): 440–58.10.2307/2132147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith. 1998. Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226452739.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Woon, Jonathan, and Pope, Jeremy. 2008. “Made in Congress? Testing the Electoral Implications of Party Ideological Brand Names.” Journal of Politics 70 (3): 823–36.10.1017/S002238160808078XCrossRefGoogle Scholar