IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v76y1993i1-2p151-72.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ideology, Voting, and Shirking

Author

Listed:
  • Kau, James B
  • Rubin, Paul H

Abstract

Since the authors first raised the issue in 1979, scholars have addressed two questions regarding ideology and congressional voting. Does ideology have an impact on such voting? Do representatives shirk by voting their own ideology rather than their constituents' interests? For the first question, it appears that there is a consensus that ideology does matter, although they present some confirming evidence for 1980. The second question has been confused; some think that ideology and shirking are identical, although they are logically separate categories. The authors show that even if ideological shirking exists, it is relatively unimportant. They also show that self interested (non-ideological) shirking exists. They conclude that research efforts to untangle constituents' and representatives' separate ideologies have been misguided and that further efforts to examine the determinants of constituent ideology should be pursued. Copyright 1993 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Kau, James B & Rubin, Paul H, 1993. "Ideology, Voting, and Shirking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 76(1-2), pages 151-172, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:76:y:1993:i:1-2:p:151-72
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dennis, Christopher & Bishin, Benjamin & Nicolaou, Politimy, 2000. "Constituent diversity and congress: the case of NAFTA," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 349-360, July.
    2. Dennis, Christopher, 1998. "Support for campaign spending limitations in the U. S. senate: The role of party, ideology and electoral security," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 641-649.
    3. Peter T. Calcagno & Meg M. Montgomery, 2021. "The gender wage gap: an analysis of US congressional staff members," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 183-201, July.
    4. René Lindstädt & Ryan Wielen, 2011. "Timely shirking: time-dependent monitoring and its effects on legislative behavior in the U.S. Senate," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 119-148, July.
    5. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2008:i:25:p:1-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Lauren Cohen & Karl B. Diether & Christopher Malloy, 2012. "Legislating Stock Prices," NBER Working Papers 18291, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Sungmun Choi, 2017. "Politician’s ideology and campaign contributions from interest groups," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 1733-1746, December.
    8. Dennis, Christopher & Medoff, Marshall H. & Magnera, Michael, 2008. "Constituents' economic interests and senator support for spending limitations," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2443-2453, December.
    9. François Facchini & Louis Jaeck, 2019. "Ideology and the rationality of non-voting," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(3), pages 265-286, August.
    10. Cohen, Lauren & Diether, Karl & Malloy, Christopher, 2013. "Legislating stock prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 574-595.
    11. Kahn, Matthew E & Matsusaka, John G, 1997. "Demand for Environmental Goods: Evidence from Voting Patterns on California Initiatives," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(1), pages 137-173, April.
    12. Martin Machay & Alan Steinberg, 2020. "NASA Funding in Congress: Money Matters," European Journal of Business Science and Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Faculty of Business and Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 5-20.
    13. François Facchini & Mickaël Melki, 2012. "Political Ideology and Economic Growth in a Democracy: The French Experience, 1871 - 2009," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12003, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    14. Peter A. Zaleski & Penny Maier Donati, 2000. "Tort Reform Voting in the U.S. Senate," Public Finance Review, , vol. 28(5), pages 415-427, September.
    15. Robert Lowry, 1998. "Religion and the demand for membership in environmental citizen groups," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 223-240, March.
    16. Potters, Jan & Sloof, Randolph, 1996. "Interest groups: A survey of empirical models that try to assess their influence," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 403-442, November.
    17. Elise Grieg, 2021. "Public opinion and special interests in American environmental politics," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 21/349, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    18. J. R. Clark & Dwight R. Lee, 2003. "Trust in Government as a Constitutional Consequence," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 18(Spring 20), pages 1-21.
    19. Atif Mian & Amir Sufi & Francesco Trebbi, 2010. "The Political Economy of the US Mortgage Default Crisis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 1967-1998, December.
    20. Stanley L. Winer & Michael W. Tofias & Bernard Grofman & John H. Aldrich, 2007. "Is it Economics or Politics? Trending Economic Factors and the Structure of Congress in the Growth of Government, 1930-2002 – revised version: Trending Economic Factors and the Structure of Congress i," Carleton Economic Papers 07-04, Carleton University, Department of Economics, revised 17 Jan 2008.
    21. Bronars, Stephen G & Lott, John R, Jr, 1997. "Do Campaign Donations Alter How a Politician Votes? Or, Do Donors Support Candidates Who Value the Same Things That They Do?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(2), pages 317-350, October.
    22. Luzi Hail & Ahmed Tahoun & Clare Wang, 2018. "Corporate Scandals and Regulation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 617-671, May.
    23. Franklin G. Mixon & Rand W. Ressler & M. Troy Gibson, 2003. "Congressional Memberships as Political Advertising: Evidence from the U.S. Senate," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 414-424, October.

    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:kap:pubcho:v:76:y:1993:i:1-2:p:151-72. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.