How Citizens Want Their Legislator to Vote

Abstract

Different people have different views about what elected representatives should do in a democracy. Some people think legislators should follow their own conscience (personal view), others think they should do what the majority of citizens in their constituency want (view of the constituency), and yet others think they should do what they promised during the election campaign (campaign promise). Sometimes, these considerations converge, that is, the legislator is personally in favor of a proposed legislation, he or she promised to vote for that legislation in the previous election campaign, and there is majority support for it in the legislator's constituency. However, which of these consideration(s) should matter the most when there is a conflict? Using an experimental design, we ascertain how these principles of representation affect citizens' views about how legislators should vote on a salient policy (immigration). Of the three styles of representation, we find that citizens pay the greatest attention to the state of public opinion in their constituency.

What to expect when you are expecting: preferences for representation among voters and political elites

“…Werner (2019) distinguishes between (1) promise keepingrepresentatives act in accordance with their election pledges, (2) responsiveness to public opinionrepresentatives reflect the current opinion of their voters, and (3) enacting the common goodrepresentatives act in the interest of the common good. In a corresponding manner, Dassonneville et al (2020) make a distinction between preferences for MPs (1) to do what they promised during the election campaign (promissory mandate), (2) to act in line with the preferences of the majority of citizens in their constituency (opinion mandate), and (3) to follow their own conscience (trustee mandate). An attempt to measure preferences for these options soon runs into methodological obstacles.…”

“…While there is substantial literature on MPs' perceptions of their parliamentary roles (for review, see Andeweg 2012;Brack et al 2016) and a growing number of studies examining voters' expectations (André et al 2010;Wass 2010, 2011;Carman 2006Carman , 2007Dassonneville et al 2020;Davidson 1970;Doherty 2013;Kornberg et al 1980;McMurray and Parsons 1965;Patterson et al 1975;Werner 2019), only a handful of analyses have focused on congruence between the two. Following the seminal Canadian study by Kornberg et al (1980), Holmberg (1989) noticed that the members of the Swedish parliament and voters clearly diverged in relation to their views on preferred roles of the representatives.…”

Comment chercher ?

“…(Blais, 2000) ; Losers’ Consent (Anderson et al, 2005) ; How Citizens want their Legislator to Vote ? (Dassonneville et al, à venir) ; Do Voters Benchmark Economic Performance ? (Arel-Bundock et al, 2021) ; Do People want a Fairer Electoral System ?…”

Fulfilling Campaign Promises or Following Public Opinion: Does the Size of the Majority Matter?

“…Our research is inspired by recent studies that have used an experimental design to determine what representational style citizens prefer (Campbell et al, 2019; Dassonneville et al, forthcoming; Doherty et al, 2016, 2019; Werner, 2019a, 2019b). The basic idea is to present respondents with concrete situations and ask them what they think the legislator or party should do, with the various options corresponding to different styles of representation.…”

“…However, contrary to Werner (2019a, 2019b), and in line with Dassonneville et al (forthcoming), we select a concrete issue that is highly salient and about which most people are likely to have formed prior opinions. We choose the issue of immigration.…”