Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the American States, 1960-93

Berry, William D.; Ringquist, Evan J.; Fording, Richard C.; Hanson, Russell L.

doi:10.2307/2991759

Cited by 1,337 publications

(1,096 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,078

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Berry et al (1998) employ, for example, political positions in the US Congress to estimate state party positions. We deviate from Berry et al (1998) in employing new data on the ideological mapping of US state legislatures by Shor and McCarty (2011) to relax the standard assumption that members of specific parties hold the same ideological positions across all US states. We furthermore distinguish between the party ideology of governors and the two chambers of parliaments.…”

Section: Measuring Party Ideology Across the Us Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The size and scope of government in the US states: does party ideology matter?

Bjørnskov

Potrafke

2013

Int Tax Public Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. (2011) that considers spatial and temporal differences in Democratic and Republican Party ideology. We distinguish between three types of divided government: overall divided government, proposal division and approval division. The main result suggests that Republican governors have been more active in deregulating labor markets. We find that ideologyinduced policies were counteracted under overall divided government and proposal division. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor mayJEL Code: D72, H70, O51.

show abstract

Section: Measuring Party Ideology Across the Us Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The size and scope of government in the US states: does party ideology matter?

Bjørnskov

Potrafke

2013

Int Tax Public Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(GOV) ideology (Berry, Ringquist, Fording, and Hanson (1998)) for the relevant state in the year in which the decision was made (capturing incentive effects). The justice-specific data is summarized in Table 8 in the Appendix.…”

Section: Data and Specificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

To elect or to appoint? Bias, information, and responsiveness of bureaucrats and politicians

Iaryczower

Lewis

Shum

2013

Journal of Public Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we address empirically the trade-offs involved in choosing between bureaucrats and politicians. In order to do this, we need to map institutions of selection and retention of public officials to the type of public officials they induce. We do this by specifying a collective decision-making model, and exploiting its equilibrium information to obtain estimates of the unobservable types. We focus on criminal decisions across US states' Supreme Courts. We find that justices that are shielded from voters' influence ("bureaucrats") on average (i) have better information, (ii) are more likely to change their preconceived opinions about a case, and (iii) are more effective (make less mistakes) than their elected counterparts ("politicians"). We evaluate how performance would change if the courts replaced majority rule with unanimity rule.

show abstract

“…1 They determined the percent of each type in each state and estimated state-level results. In the early 1970s, Weber et al (1972Weber et al ( -1973 expanded the number of voter types from 480 to 960 categories and were able to estimate state-level opinions on a variety of issues (for recent research on state-level estimates, see Erikson et al 1993, Berry et al 1998, and Brace et al 2002.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bayesian Multilevel Estimation with Poststratification: State-Level Estimates from National Polls

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We fit a multilevel logistic regression model for the mean of a binary response variable conditional on poststratification cells. This approach combines the modeling approach often used in small-area estimation with the population information used in poststratification (see Gelman and Little 1997, Survey Methodology 23:127-135). To validate the method, we apply it to U.S. preelection polls for 1988 and 1992, poststratified by state, region, and the usual demographic variables. We evaluate the model by comparing it to state-level election outcomes. The multilevel model outperforms more commonly used models in political science. We envision the most important usage of this method to be not forecasting elections but estimating public opinion on a variety of issues at the state level.

show abstract

Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the American States, 1960-93

Cited by 1,337 publications

References 31 publications

The size and scope of government in the US states: does party ideology matter?

The size and scope of government in the US states: does party ideology matter?

To elect or to appoint? Bias, information, and responsiveness of bureaucrats and politicians

Bayesian Multilevel Estimation with Poststratification: State-Level Estimates from National Polls

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About