IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mlb/wpaper/1156.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

From Policy Preferences to Partisan Support: A Quantitative Assessment of Political Culture in South Dakota

Author

Listed:
  • Russell H. Hillberry, William D. Anderson

Abstract

This study uses cross-county variation in support for 46 ballot measures to identify political subcultures in South Dakota and to study them. A hierarchical clustering method applied to county-level election returns allows the identification of subcultures at various levels of granularity. We choose a threshold that suggests seven subcultures as a useful summary of the data. While the allocation procedure employs only election returns as an input, the identified subcultures match observable regularities in demographics and geography. Subsequent factor analysis of election returns from the ballot measures reveals a multi-dimensional policy space. By contrast, a similar analysis of support for political candidates reveals a single partisan spectrum as a dominant feature of the data. A county’s location in the revealed policy space well explains its location along this partisan spectrum. The link between policy and partisan preferences is robust to the inclusion of a wide variety of additional control measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Russell H. Hillberry, William D. Anderson, 2012. "From Policy Preferences to Partisan Support: A Quantitative Assessment of Political Culture in South Dakota," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1156, The University of Melbourne.
    • Handle: RePEc:mlb:wpaper:1156
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://fbe.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/784355/1156.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elisabeth R. Gerber & Jeffrey B. Lewis, 2004. "Beyond the Median: Voter Preferences, District Heterogeneity, and Political Representation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(6), pages 1364-1383, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fabian Gouret & Stéphane Rossignol, 2019. "Intensity valence," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(1), pages 63-112, June.
    2. Stadelmann, David & Portmann, Marco & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2013. "Quantifying parliamentary representation of constituents’ preferences with quasi-experimental data," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 170-180.
    3. Anthony Bertelli & Lilliard Richardson, 2008. "Ideological extremism and electoral design. Multimember versus single member districts," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 347-368, October.
    4. Saiegh, Sebastián, 2014. "Partisanship, Ideology, and Representation in Latin America," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6607, Inter-American Development Bank.
    5. Mateos-Planas, Xavier, 2009. "Demographics and the politics of capital taxation in a life-cycle economy," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0909, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    6. David Stadelmann & Marco Portmann & Reiner Eichenberger, 2012. "Do Female Representatives Adhere More Closely to Citizens’ Preferences Than Male Representatives?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2012-02, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    7. Eric J. Brunner & Stephen L. Ross, 2009. "Is the Median Voter Decisive? Evidence of 'Ends Against the Middle' From Referenda Voting Patterns," Working papers 2009-02, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised May 2010.
    8. Li, Cheng & Wang, Le & Zhang, Junsen, 2024. "Politician’s childhood experience and government policies: Evidence from the Chinese Great Famine," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 76-92.
    9. Brooks, Leah & Strange, William C., 2011. "The micro-empirics of collective action: The case of business improvement districts," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1358-1372.
    10. Lindqvist, Erik & Östling, Robert, 2010. "Political Polarization and the Size of Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(3), pages 543-565, August.
    11. Sebastián Saiegh, 2014. "Partisanship, Ideology, and Representation in Latin America," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 86258, Inter-American Development Bank.
    12. Stadelmann, David & Portmann, Marco & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2012. "Evaluating the median voter model’s explanatory power," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 114(3), pages 312-314.
    13. Kai Hao Yang & Alexander K. Zentefis, 2022. "Gerrymandering and the Limits of Representative Democracy," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2328, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    14. Stadelmann, David & Torrens, Gustavo, 2020. "Who is the ultimate boss of legislators: Voters, special interest groups or parties?," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224562, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    15. Hawkins, Christopher V. & Chia-Yuan, Yu, 2018. "Voter support for environmental bond referenda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 193-200.
    16. Eric Brunner & Stephen L. Ross & Ebonya Washington, 2013. "Does Less Income Mean Less Representation?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 53-76, May.
    17. Funk, Patricia & Gathmann, Christina, 2013. "Voter preferences, direct democracy and government spending," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 300-319.
    18. Mihir Bhattacharya, 2018. "A model of electoral competition between national and regional parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 30(3), pages 335-357, July.
    19. David Stadelmann & Reiner Eichenberger & Marco Portmann, 2011. "Parliaments as Condorcet Juries: Quasi-Experimental Evidence on the Representation of Majority Preferences," CREMA Working Paper Series 2011-14, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    20. Dronyk-Trosper, Trey, 2017. "Getting what we vote for: A regression discontinuity test of ballot initiative outcomes," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 46-56.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Constraint; political culture; partisanship; efficient classification;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:mlb:wpaper:1156. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Dandapani Lokanathan (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/demelau.html .

    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.