One of the most influential findings of the voting behavior literature of the past two decades was the realization that the clarity of the domestic institutional context influences the relationship between economic perceptions and incumbent vote. This article extends this “clarity of responsibility” argument beyond economics to another policy field—European integration. To what extent do national political institutions mediate the extent to which voters reward or punish government for their policies relating to the European Union (EU) or European integration, that is, EU issue voting? Using data from the 2004 European Election Study, the authors provide evidence that clarity of responsibility affects the strength of EU issue voting. Specifically, EU issue voting is accentuated when the domestic institutional environment provides clear lines of responsibility. This finding suggests that the “Europeanization” of national electoral politics depends in part on the domestic institutional context within each member state.
Agresti, A. ( 2002). Categorical data analysis. New York, NY: John Wiley.
2.
Anderson, C.J. ( 1995). The dynamics of public support for coalition governments . Comparative Political Studies, 28, 350-383.
3.
Anderson, C.J. ( 2000). Economic voting and political context: A comparative perspective. Electoral Studies, 19, 151-170.
4.
Anderson, C. ( 2006). Economic voting and multi-level governance: A comparative individual-level analysis. American Journal of Political Science , 50, 449-463.
5.
Bengtsson, Å. ( 2004). Economic voting: The effect of political context, volatility, and turnout on voters’ assignment of responsibility. European Journal of Political Research, 43, 749-767.
6.
Börzel, T., & Risse, T. ( 2003). Conceptualizing the domestic impact of Europe. In K. Featherstone & C. Radaelli (Eds.), The politics of Europeanization (pp. 57-70). Oxford , UK: Oxford University Press.
7.
Börzel, T., & Risse, T. ( 2007). Europeanization: The domestic impact of European Union politics. In K. E. Jørgensen, M. Pollack, & B. Rosamond (Eds.), Handbook of European Union politics (pp. 483-504). London, UK: SAGE.
8.
Brambor, T., Clark, W.R., & Golder, M. ( 2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63-82.
9.
Carrubba, C. ( 2001). The electorate connection in European Union politics . Journal of Politics, 63, 141-158.
10.
Cini, M. ( 2007). European Union politics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
11.
Coultrap, J. ( 1999). From parliamentarism to pluralism: Models of democracy and the European Union’s "democratic deficit." Journal of Theoretical Politics, 11, 107-135.
12.
de Vries, C.E. ( 2007). Sleeping giant: Fact or fairytale? How European integration affects national elections. European Union Politics, 8, 363-385.
13.
de Vries, C.E. ( 2009). The impact of EU referenda on national electoral politics: Evidence from the Dutch case. West European Politics, 32, 142-171.
14.
Evans, G. ( 1998). Euroscepticism and conservative electoral support: How an asset became a liability. British Journal of Political Science, 28, 573-590.
15.
Evans, G. ( 2002). European integration, party politics and voting in the 2001 election. British Elections and Parties Review, 12(1), 95-110.
16.
Føllesdal, A., & Hix, S. ( 2006). Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: A response to Majone and Moravcsik. Journal of Common Market Studies , 44, 533-562.
17.
Gabel, M.J. ( 1998). Interests and Integration: Market Liberalization, Public Opinion and European Integration. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
18.
Gabel, M.J. ( 2000). European integration, voters and national politics. West European Politics, 23, 52-72.
19.
Gellman, A., & Hill, J. ( 2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/ hierarchical models. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
20.
Giger, N. (in press). Do voters punish the government for welfare state retrenchment? A comparative study of electoral costs associated with social policy. Comparative European Politics.
21.
Golder, M. ( 2005). Democratic electoral systems around the world, 1947-2000 . Electoral Studies, 24, 103-121.
22.
Hobolt, S.B., Spoon, J.-J., & Tilley, J. ( 2009). A vote against Europe? Explaining defection at the 1999 and 2004 European Parliament election. British Journal of Political Science, 39, 93-115.
23.
Jackman, S. ( 2000). Estimation and inference via Bayesian simulation: An introduction to Markov Chain Monte Carlo. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 369-398.
24.
Jørgensen, K.E., Pollack, M.A., & Rosamond, B. ( 2006). Handbook of European Union politics. London, UK: SAGE.
25.
Katz, R. ( 2000). Models of democracy: Elite attitudes and the democratic deficit in theEuropean Union. European Union Politics, 2, 53-79.
26.
Kernell, S. ( 1997). Complementarity and retrospective voting in multiparty systems. Unpublished manuscript.
27.
Lewis-Beck, M. ( 1986). Comparative economic voting: Britain, France, Germany, Italy. American Journal of Political Science, 30, 315-346.
28.
Lewis-Beck, M. ( 1988). Economics and elections: The major Western democracies . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
29.
Long, S.J., & Freese, J. ( 2006). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using STATA (2nd ed.). College Station, TX: STATA Press.
30.
Moravcsik, A. ( 2002). In defence of the democratic deficit: Reassessing the legitimacy of the European Union. Journal of Common Market Studies, 4, 603-634.
31.
Nadeau, R., Niemi, R.G., & Yoshinaka, A. ( 2002). A Cross-national analysis of economic voting: Taking account of the political context across time and nations. Electoral Studies, 21, 403-423.
32.
Powell, B.G. ( 2000). Elections as instruments of democracy: Majoritarian and proportional visions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
33.
Powell, B.G., & Whitten, G.D. ( 1993). A cross-national analysis of economic voting: Taking into account political context. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 391-414.
34.
Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. ( 1992). Hierarchical linear models: Application and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). London, UK: SAGE.
35.
Roberts, A. ( 2008). Hyperaccountability: Economic voting in Central and Eastern Europe. Electoral Studies, 27, 533-546.
36.
Roberts, A. ( 2009). The quality of democracy in Eastern Europe: Public preferences and policy reforms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Royed, T.J., Leyden, K.M., & Borrelli, S.A. (2000). Is "clarity of responsibility" important for economic voting? Revisiting Powell and Whitten’s hypothesis . British Journal of Political Science, 30, 669-698.
38.
Samuels, D. ( 2004). Presidentialism and accountability for the economy in comparative perspective. American Political Science Review , 98, 425-436.
39.
Schoen, H. ( 2008). Turkey’s bid for EU membership, contrasting views of public opinion, and vote choice: Evidence from the 2005 German federal election. Electoral Studies, 27, 344-355.
40.
Snijders, T.A.B., & Bosker, R.J. ( 1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modelling. London, UK: SAGE.
41.
Steenbergen, M.R., & Jones, B.S. ( 2002). Modelling multilevel data structures. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 218-237.
42.
Strøm, K. ( 1990). Minority government and majority rule. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Tavits, M. ( 2007). Clarity of responsibility and corruption. American Journal of Political Science, 51, 218-229.
44.
Taylor, M. ( 2000). Channeling frustrations: Institutions, economic fluctuations, and voting behavior. European Journal of Political Research , 38, 95-134.
45.
Tillman, E.R. ( 2004). The European Union at the ballot box? European integration and voting behavior in the new member states. Comparative Political Studies, 37, 590-610.
46.
Tillman, E.R. ( 2008). Economic judgments, party choice, and voter abstention in cross-national perspective. Comparative Political Studies , 41, 1290-1309.
Zweifel, T.D. ( 2002). Who is without sin cast the first stone: The EU’s democratic deficit in comparison. Journal of European Public Policy, 9, 812-840.
