Messaging, policy and “credible” votes: do members of Congress vote differently when policy is on the line?

IF 1.9 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
T. Gray, J. Jenkins
{"title":"Messaging, policy and “credible” votes: do members of Congress vote differently when policy is on the line?","authors":"T. Gray, J. Jenkins","doi":"10.1017/S0143814X2200006X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many recorded roll calls in Congress each year are votes on bills that have no chance of becoming law, or are purely symbolic, or are procedural without policy content. Yet models of voting and measurement models of member preferences make assumptions that vote choices are largely about utility derived from policies. We consider the possibility that votes plausibly connected to policy and votes not plausibly connected to policy may have different data-generating processes and rely on different utility functions. Substantively, similarity across different contexts for policy change implies an importance of messaging over policy. Methodologically, similarity across these contexts is necessary to avoid biasing estimates of member preferences. We find that members’ voting patterns are highly stable across contexts in which policy change is credible and not credible. This indicates that existing measures of ideal points are likely not dramatically biased by the inclusion of policy-irrelevant votes.","PeriodicalId":47578,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy","volume":"42 1","pages":"637 - 655"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X2200006X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Many recorded roll calls in Congress each year are votes on bills that have no chance of becoming law, or are purely symbolic, or are procedural without policy content. Yet models of voting and measurement models of member preferences make assumptions that vote choices are largely about utility derived from policies. We consider the possibility that votes plausibly connected to policy and votes not plausibly connected to policy may have different data-generating processes and rely on different utility functions. Substantively, similarity across different contexts for policy change implies an importance of messaging over policy. Methodologically, similarity across these contexts is necessary to avoid biasing estimates of member preferences. We find that members’ voting patterns are highly stable across contexts in which policy change is credible and not credible. This indicates that existing measures of ideal points are likely not dramatically biased by the inclusion of policy-irrelevant votes.
信息、政策和“可信”投票:当政策岌岌可危时,国会议员的投票方式会有所不同吗?
每年在国会中有许多记录在案的点名是对没有机会成为法律的法案的投票,或者纯粹是象征性的,或者是没有政策内容的程序性的。然而,投票模型和成员偏好的衡量模型假设,投票选择在很大程度上与政策带来的效用有关。我们考虑这样一种可能性,即看似与政策相关的投票和非看似与政策相关的投票可能具有不同的数据生成过程,并依赖于不同的效用函数。实际上,策略更改在不同上下文中的相似性意味着通过策略传递消息的重要性。在方法上,这些上下文之间的相似性是必要的,以避免对成员偏好的偏见估计。我们发现,无论政策变化是可信的还是不可信的,成员的投票模式都高度稳定。这表明,现有的理想得分衡量标准可能不会因为纳入与政策无关的投票而产生显著偏差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Policy applies social science theories and concepts to significant political, economic and social issues and to the ways in which public policies are made. Its articles deal with topics of concern to public policy scholars in America, Europe, Japan and other advanced industrial nations. The journal often publishes articles that cut across disciplines, such as environmental issues, international political economy, regulatory policy and European Union processes. Its peer reviewers come from up to a dozen social science disciplines and countries across three continents, thus ensuring both analytic rigour and accuracy in reference to national and policy context.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信