The importance of airing positive constituent casework during campaigns is a testament to the accuracy of saying, “All politics is local.” This phrase, attributed to former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill (D-MA), essentially means that the most important motivations directing voters are rooted in local concerns. In general, this is true. People naturally feel more driven by the things that affect them on a daily basis. These are concerns like the quality of the roads, the availability of good jobs, and the cost and quality of public education. Good senators and representatives understand this and will seek to use their influence and power in office to affect these issues for the better. This is an age-old strategy for success in office and elections.
Political scientists have taken note of some voting patterns that appear to challenge this common assumption, however. In 1960, political scientist Angus
Campbell proposed the
surge-and-decline theory to explain these patterns.
Angus Campbell. 1960. “Surge and Decline: A Study of Electoral Change.”
The Public Opinion Quarterly 24, No. 3: 397–418.
Campbell noticed that since the Civil War, with the exception of 1934, the president’s party has consistently lost seats in Congress during the midterm elections. He proposed that the reason was a surge in political stimulation during presidential elections, which contributes to greater turnout and brings in voters who are ordinarily less interested in politics. These voters, Campbell argued, tend to favor the party holding the presidency. In contrast, midterm elections witness the opposite effect. They are less stimulating and have lower turnout because less-interested voters stay home. This shift, in Campbell’s theory, provides an advantage to the party not currently occupying the presidency.
In the decades since Campbell’s influential theory was published, a number of studies have challenged his conclusions. Nevertheless, the pattern of midterm elections benefiting the president’s opposition has persisted.
“Midterm congressional elections explained: Why the president’s party typically loses,” 1 October 2014, http://journalistsresource.org/studies/politics/elections/voting-patterns-midterm-congressional-elections-why-presidents-party-typically-loses (May 1, 2016).
Only in exceptional years has this pattern been broken: first in 1998 during President Bill Clinton’s second term and the Monica Lewinsky scandal, when exit polls indicated most voters opposed the idea of impeaching the president, and then again in 2002, following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the ensuing declaration of a “war on terror.”
The evidence does suggest that national concerns, rather than local ones, can function as powerful motivators at the polls. Consider, for example, the role of the Iraq War in bringing about a Democratic rout of the Republicans in the House in 2006 and in the Senate in 2008. Unlike previous wars in Europe and Vietnam, the war in Iraq was fought by a very small percentage of the population.
“A Profile of the Modern Military,” 5 October 2011, http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/10/05/chapter-6-a-profile-of-the-modern-military/ (May 1, 2016).
The vast majority of citizens were not soldiers, few had relatives fighting in the war, and most did not know anyone who directly suffered from the prolonged conflict. Voters in large numbers were motivated by the political and economic disaster of the war to vote for politicians they believed would end it (
[link] ).
Congressional elections may be increasingly driven by national issues. Just two decades ago, straight-ticket, party-line voting was still relatively rare across most of the country.
Dhrumil Mehta and Harry Enten, “The 2014 Senate Elections Were the Most Nationalized In Decades,” 2 December 2014, http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-2014-senate-elections-were-the-most-nationalized-in-decades/ (May 1, 2016); Gregory Giroux, “Straight-Ticket Voting Rises As Parties Polarize,”
Bloomberg , 29 November 2014, http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2014-11-29/straightticket-voting-rises-as-parties-polarize (May 1, 2016).
In much of the South, which began to vote overwhelmingly Republican in presidential elections during the 1960s and 1970s, Democrats were still commonly elected to the House and Senate. The candidates themselves and the important local issues, apart from party affiliation, were important drivers in congressional elections. This began to change in the 1980s and 1990s, as Democratic representatives across the region began to dwindle. And the South isn’t alone; areas in the Northeast and the Northwest have grown increasingly Democratic. Indeed, the 2014 midterm election was the most nationalized election in many decades. Voters who favor a particular party in a presidential election are now much more likely to also support that same party in House and Senate elections than was the case just a few decades ago.
Summary
Since the House is closest to its constituents because reelection is so frequent a need, it tends to be more easily led by fleeting public desires. In contrast, the Senate’s distance from its constituents allows it to act more deliberately. Each type of representative, however, must raise considerable sums of money in order to stay in office. Attempts by Congress to rein in campaign spending have largely failed. Nevertheless, incumbents tend to have the easiest time funding campaigns and retaining their seats. They also benefit from the way parties organize primary elections, which are designed to promote incumbency.
is it possible to leave every good at the same level
Joseph
I don't think so. because check it, if the demand for chicken increases, people will no longer consume fish like they used to causing a fall in the demand for fish
Anuolu
is not really possible to let the value of a goods to be same at the same time.....
Salome
Suppose the inflation rate is 6%, does it mean that all the goods you purchase will cost
6% more than previous year? Provide with reasoning.
Not necessarily. To measure the inflation rate economists normally use an averaged price index of a basket of certain goods. So if you purchase goods included in the basket, you will notice that you pay 6% more, otherwise not necessarily.
Good day
How do I calculate this question: C= 100+5yd G= 2000 T= 2000 I(planned)=200.
Suppose the actual output is 3000. What is the level of planned expenditures at this level of output?
I am Camara from Guinea west Africa... happy to meet you guys here
Sekou
ma management ho
Amisha
ahile becheclor ho
Amisha
hjr ktm bta ho
ani k kaam grnu hunxa tw
Amisha
belatari
Amisha
1st year ho
Amisha
nd u
Amisha
ahh
Amisha
kaha biratnagar
Amisha
ys
Amisha
kina k vo
Amisha
money as unit of account means what?
Kalombe
A unit of account is something that can be used to value goods and services and make calculations
Jim
all of you please speak in English I can't understand you're language
Muhammad
I want to know how can we define macroeconomics in one line
Muhammad
it must be .9 or 0.9
no Mpc is greater than 1
Y=100+.9Y+50
Y-.9Y=150
0.1Y/0.1=150/0.1
Y=1500
Kalombe
Mercy is it clear?😋
Kalombe
hi can someone help me on this question
If a negative shocks shifts the IS curve to the left, what type of policy do you suggest so as to stabilize the level of output?
discuss your answer using appropriate graph.