Aggregate-level studies of gubernatorial elections suggest that the state's economy is not a significant determinant of gubernatorial vote choice These findings run counter to expectations of retrospective voting behavior Gover nors today serve longer terms, have greater institutional powers, and are more publicly visible-all of which suggest that governors should be held accountable by the voters. The expectation is that individual-level studies, which measure voters' perceptions of the state's economy, will show a strong relationship between the state's economy and gubernatorial vote choice. Analysis of the 1982 and 1986 CBS/NY Times Exit Polls demonstrates that voters' evaluations of the state's economy have a significant impact on vote choice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldrich, John H., and Forrest D. Nelson .1987. Linear Probability, Logit, and Probit Models, 4th ed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage University Press.
2.
Beyle, Thad L.1985. Gubernatonal Transitions: The 1982 Elections. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
3.
_. 1990. "Governors." In Virginia Gray, Harold Jacobs, and Kenneth Vines , eds., Politics in the American States, 5th ed. Boston: Little, Brown.
4.
_. ed. 1992. Governors and Hard Times. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
5.
Bibby, John F1983. "State House Elections at Midterm." In Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein, eds., The American National Elections in 1982 . Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
6.
Bloom, Howard S., and Douglas Price1975. "Voters Response to Short-run Economic Conditions: The Asymmetric Effect of Prosperity and Recession." American Political Science Review69: 1240-54.
7.
Brace, Paul.1993. State Government and Economic Performance. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
8.
Chubb, John E.1988. "Institutions, the Economy, and the Dynamics of State Elections." American Political Science Review82: 133-54.
9.
Congressional Budget Office.1988. " Environmental Federalism: Allocating Responsibilities for Environmental Protection ." Washington, DC: Staff Working Paper, The Congressional Budget Office.
10.
Cowart, Andrew T.1973. "Electoral Choice in the American States: Incumbency Effects, Partisan Forces, and Divergent Partisan Majorities." American Political Science Review67: 835-53.
11.
Erikson, Robert.1990. "Economic Conditions and the Congressional Vote: A Review of the Macro-Level Evidence." American Journal of Political Science34: 373-99.
12.
Fair, Ray.1978. "The Effects of Economic Events on Votes for President ," Review of Economics and Statistics60: 159-73.
13.
Fiorina, Morris P1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
14.
Hinckley, Barbara.1970. "Incumbency and the Presidential Vote in Senate Elections: Defining Parameters of Subpresidential Voting." American Political Science Review64: 836-42.
15.
Holbrook, Thomas M.1987. "National Factors in Gubernatorial Elections." American Politics Quarterly15: 471-83.
16.
_. 1991. "Presidential Elections in Space and Time" American Journal of Political Science35: 91-109.
17.
_. 1993. "Institutional Strength and Gubernatorial Elections." American Politics Quarterly21: 261-71.
18.
Howell, Susan, and James Vanderleeuw.1990. "Economic Effects on State Governors." American Politics Quarterly64: 154-62.
19.
Jewell, Malcolm E., and David M. Olson.1988. American State Political Parties and Elections, 3rd ed. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
20.
Kenney, Patrick J.1983. "The Effect of State Economic Conditions on the Vote for Governor" Social Science Quarterly64: 154-62.
21.
Kiewiet, Roderick D.1983. Macroeconomics and Micropolitics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
Kramer, Gerald.1971. "Short-Term Fluctuations in U.S. Voting Behavior, 1896-1964 " American Political Science Review27: 131-43.
23.
Markus, Gregory.1988. "The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on the Presidential Vote: A Pooled Cross-Sectional Analysis." American Journal of Political Science32: 137-54.
24.
Morehouse, Sarah M.1990. "Money versus Party Effort: Nominating for Governor." American Journal of Political Science34: 706-24.
25.
Norusis, Marija.1990. SPSS Advanced Statistics User's Guide. USA SPSS Inc.44-69.
26.
Piereson, James E.1975. "Presidential Popularity and Midterm Voting at Different Levels." AmericanJournal of Politics19: 683-94.
27.
_. 1977. "Sources of Candidate Success in Gubernatorial Elections, 1910-1970." Journal of Politics39: 939-58.
Scholzman, Kay, and Sidney Verba.1979. Injury to Insult. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
30.
Simon, Dennis M.1989. "Presidents, Governors, and Electoral Accountability." Journal of Politics51: 286-304.
31.
Squire, Peverill.1992. "Challenger Profile and Gubernatorial Elections." Western Political Quarterly28: 125-42.
32.
Squire, Peverill, and Christina Fastnow .1992. "Comparing Gubernatorial and Senate Elections." Paper Prepared for the 1992 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
33.
Stein, Robert M.1990. "Economic Voting for Governor and US Senator: The Electoral Consequences of Federalism." Journal of Politics52: 29-53.
34.
Tompkin, Mark E.1984. "The Electoral Fortunes on Gubernatorial Incumbents: 1947-1981 . Journal of Politics46: 520-39.
35.
_. 1988. "Have Gubernatorial Elections Become More Distinctive Contests." Journal of Politics50: 192-205.
36.
Tufte, Edward.1978. Political Control of the Economy. Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press.
37.
Turett, J.S.1971. "The Vulnerability of American Governors: 1900-1969." Midwest Journal of Political Science15: 108-32.
38.
Vogel, Ronald.1992. "Economic Effects Upon Gubernatorial Incumbency Decisions: 1969-1987." Paper Prepared for the 1992 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
