American Politics Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gulati, G. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Politics Research, Vol. 32, No. 5, 495-520 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X04263820

Revisiting the Link Between Electoral Competition and Policy Extremism in the U.S. Congress

Girish J. Gulati

Wellesley College

Prominent theories of American political parties imply that higher levels of competition cause lawmakers to be more responsive to the center of public opinion, but there is little empirical evidence to support this assertion. Furthermore, many studies have found that competition causes lawmakers to be less responsive to public opinion as a whole and more responsive to their own partisans. Parties and candidates pursue a "mobilization" rather than "moderation" strategy supposedly because competitive constituencies are inherently heterogeneous, which then creates a context for more ideological campaigns and a more partisan policymaking environment. An analysis of U.S. Senate roll call votes between 1989 and 2000 reveals that legislators from more marginal states are less responsive to the ideological center than legislators from safe states. Furthermore, there is no evidence of a relationship between constituency diversity and electoral competition or that greater partisanship is the result of greater diversity.

Key Words: Congress • electoral competition • marginality • moderation • mobilization • constituency diversity • roll call votes


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Travel ResearchHome page
N. G. McGehee and F. Meng
The Politics of Perception: Legislative Images of the Tourism Industry in Virginia and North Carolina
Journal of Travel Research, May 1, 2006; 44(4): 368 - 378.
[Abstract] [PDF]