IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/polals/v17y2009i01p83-88_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting Adjusted ADA Scores for the U.S. Congress, 1947–2007

Author

Listed:
  • Anderson, Sarah
  • Habel, Philip

Abstract

This paper replicates and extends Groseclose, Levitt, and Snyder, “Comparing Interest Group Scores Across Time and Chambers: Adjusted ADA Scores for the U.S. Congress,” which appeared in the American Political Science Review (1999/93:33–50). We replicate the most recent unpublished extension by Dr. Groseclose and research assistants for years 1947–1999, and then we extend the analysis to include years 2000 through 2007. We make available inflation-adjusted ADA scores from 1947 through 2007, allowing scholars to incorporate the most recent interest group scores into their analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Anderson, Sarah & Habel, Philip, 2009. "Revisiting Adjusted ADA Scores for the U.S. Congress, 1947–2007," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 83-88, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:17:y:2009:i:01:p:83-88_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1047198700002400/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jo Thori Lind & Dominic Rohner, 2017. "Knowledge is Power: A Theory of Information, Income and Welfare Spending," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(336), pages 611-646, October.
    2. Jin-Hyuk Kim, 2013. "Determinants of post-congressional lobbying employment," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 107-126, May.
    3. Schelker, Mark, 2018. "Lame ducks and divided government: How voters control the unaccountable," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 131-144.
    4. Schelker, Mark, 2012. "Auditor expertise: Evidence from the public sector," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 432-435.
    5. Marta Crispino & Matteo Alpino, 2022. "The role of majority status in close elections studies," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1391, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    6. Andrew C. Chang & Linda R. Cohen & Amihai Glazer & Urbashee Paul, 2021. "Politicians Avoid Tax Increases Around Elections," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2021-004, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    7. Fidel Perez‐Sebastian & Ohad Raveh, 2019. "Federal tax policies, congressional voting and natural resources," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 1112-1164, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:17:y:2009:i:01:p:83-88_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.