Russia's 1996 Presidential Elections

McFaul, Michael

doi:10.1080/1060586x.1996.10641428

Cited by 39 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The dominant interpretation of the 1996 presidential election outcome is that Yeltsin won as the "lesser of two evils." McFaul (1996) argues that this was Russia's last "revolutionary election" where voters were asked to choose between two fundamentally different systems. Voters opted for "reform over regress."…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Wage Arrears and Economic Voting in Russia

Richter¹

2006

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T his paper revisits the issue of economic voting in the context of the 1996 Presidential Election in Russia. The election was branded as a fundamental choice between capitalism and communism, yet voters were also grappling with a large crisis of personal finances: about one in two workers experienced nonpayments of wages at the time of the elections. The analysis exploits a rich nationally representative household panel dataset to identify the impact of wage arrears on the second-round election outcome. Wage arrears reduced the vote for the incumbent President Yeltsin among workers from around 65% to 49%, which amounts to a drop of 4% in the Yeltsin vote in the second round. Support for Yeltsin vote declined with the amount of wage arrears at the time of the vote and with wage arrears in 1995. Wage arrears led more voters to believe the government to be noncaring and to favor income restrictions for the rich. Political attitudes of working men changed more than those of working women.

show abstract

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Wage Arrears and Economic Voting in Russia

Richter¹

2006

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…76 It continued in 1996, when the oligarchs made their presence known by funding Yeltsin's reelection campaign, which bought them additional benign neglect from the center. 77 And even after the financial crash in 1998, ownership groups with ties to finance continued to pursue quick profits at the expense of long-term investment. 78…”

Section: East European Politics and Societies 555mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Theft: Context and Choice in the Hungarian, Czech, and Russian Transformations, 1989-2000

Barnes¹

2003

East European Politics and Societies: and Cultures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, some post-communist political economies were burdened by impenetrable cross-ownership groups, money-laundering banks, and captured states, while others had effectively limited corruption and laid the groundwork for long-term development. Study of post-communist corruption, however, has been hampered by a tendency to treat it as an undifferentiated phenomenon across the region. Based on purposively selected case studies of Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Russia, this article begins by systematically describing the political economies of those countries in a way that allows for a useful comparison. It then argues that the varied outcomes in the former Soviet bloc grew out of a combination of two factors: (1) the context of state-economy relations at the end of the Communist Party era and (2) the choices made by new governments on how to control the transfer of state assets to the private sector. In making that argument, the article clarifies which legacies from the old regime, which policy choices in the new era, and which aspects of state capacity are most important in shaping post-communist transformations.

show abstract

“…In addition, many of these articles address other issues that may have influenced the outcome of the election, including economic conditions, underlying socioeconomic cleavages, and the degree to which the election may have been free and fair. Examples include articles focused on several different countries, such as Poland (Olson 1993, Millard 1994a), Hungary (Racz & Kukorelli 1995), Ukraine (Bojcun 1995), Bosnia (Shoup 1997), and Russia (Zlobin 1994, McFaul 1996, White et al 1997b, Oates 2000.…”

Section: Elections As Dependent Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

THEFIRSTDECADE OFPOST-COMMUNISTELECTIONS ANDVOTING: What Have We Studied, and How Have We Studied It?

Tucker

2002

Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci.

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review assesses the state of the newly emerging field of the study of post-communist elections and voting by building and analyzing a database of 101 articles on the topic that have appeared in 16 leading academic journals (8 general political science journals and 8 post-communist area studies journals) between 1990 and 2000. The database is then used to make inferences concerning both what is being studied by scholars and how it is being studied. The review systematically assesses which countries have been analyzed, the types of elections examined, the prevalence of comparative analysis, the division between quantitative and qualitative research, and the types of data used in quantitative studies. It then turns to substantive questions, examining both how scholars have explained post-communist election results and voting decisions, and what they have used these elections to explain.

show abstract

Russia's 1996 Presidential Elections

Cited by 39 publications

References 18 publications

Wage Arrears and Economic Voting in Russia

Wage Arrears and Economic Voting in Russia

Comparative Theft: Context and Choice in the Hungarian, Czech, and Russian Transformations, 1989-2000

THEFIRSTDECADE OFPOST-COMMUNISTELECTIONS ANDVOTING: What Have We Studied, and How Have We Studied It?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About