Citizens in a democracy expect elected officials will be responsive to their political opinions and govern in an effective way that improves their quality of life. However, a government that is too responsive to public sentiments may, in practice, be unable to govern effectively and promote societal well-being. This study is the first attempt to date to empirically evaluate this important potential tradeoff. Using newly developed measures of public opinion and public policy liberalism in the American states over time and a diverse battery of societal outcomes as well as multiple estimation strategies and timeframes, I find a weak and directionally inconsistent statistical relationship between policy responsiveness and government effectiveness. These findings have significant normative and theoretical implications because they suggest there is not a tradeoff between a government responding to its citizens’ opinions and it governing effectively by promoting citizens’ well-being.
AchenC. H. (1978). Measuring representation. American Journal of Political Science, 22(3), 475-510. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110458
2.
AchenC. H.BartelsL. M. (2016). Democracy for realists: Why elections do not produce responsive government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
3.
AnsolabehereS.JonesP. E. (2010). Constituents’ responses to congressional roll call voting. American Journal of Political Science, 54(3), 583-597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00448.x
BoehmkeF. J.SkinnerP. (2012). State policy innovativeness revisited. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 12(3), 303-329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532440012438890
6.
Canes-WroneB.BradyD. W.CoganJ. F. (2002). Out of step, out of office: Electoral accountability and House members’ voting. American Political Science Review, 96(1), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055402004276
7.
CarsonR. T.OppenheimerJ. A. (1984). A method of estimating the personal ideology of political representatives. American Political Science Review, 78(1), 163-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/1961255
8.
CaugheyD.WarshawC. (2018). Policy preferences and policy change: Dynamic responsiveness in the American states, 1936-2014. American Political Science Review, 112(2), 249-266. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055417000533
9.
DynesA. M.HolbeinJ. B. (2020). Noisy retrospection: The effect of party control on policy outcomes. American Political Science Review, 114(1), 237-257. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055419000649
10.
EriksonR. S.MacKuenM. B.StimsonJ. A. (2002). The macro polity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11.
EriksonR. S.WrightG. C.McIverJ. P. (1993). Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and policy in the American states. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12.
FiorinaM. P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
GilensM.PageB. I. (2014). Testing theories of American politics: Elites, interest groups, and average citizens. Perspectives on Politics, 12(3), 564-581. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592714001595
15.
GrayV.HansonR. L.KousserT. (Eds.) (2017). Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
16.
GriffinJ. D.NewmanB. (2008). Minority report: Evaluating political equality in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17.
GrumbachJ. (2021). Laboratories of democratic backsliding. University of Washington, working paper.
HelliwellJ. F.HuangH. (2008). How's your government? International evidence linking good government and well-being. British Journal of Political Science, 38(4), 595-619. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123408000306
20.
HuberG. A.HillS. J.LenzG. S. (2012). Sources of bias in retrospective decision making: Experimental evidence on voters’ limitations in controlling incumbents. American Political Science Review, 106(4), 720-741. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055412000391
21.
HutchingsV. L. (2003). Public opinion and democratic accountability: How citizens learn about politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
22.
JohannesJohn R.McAdamsJohn C. (1981). The congressional incumbency effect: Is it casework, policy compatibility, or something else? An examination of the 1978 election. American Journal of Political Science, 25(3), 512-542. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110817
23.
KaltJ. P.ZupanM. A. (1984). Capture and ideology in the economic theory of politics. American Economic Review, 74(3), 279-300.
24.
KauJ. B.RubinP. H. (1979). Self-interest, ideology, and logrolling in congressional voting. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 365-384. https://doi.org/10.1086/466947
KnackS. (2002). Social capital and the quality of government: Evidence from the states. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 772-785. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088433
27.
La PortaR.Lopez-de-SilanesF.ShleiferA.VishnyR. (1999). The quality of government. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15(1), 222-279. https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/15.1.222
LijphartA. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
30.
MatsusakaJ. G. (2001). Problems with a methodology used to evaluate the voter initiative. Journal of Politics, 63(4), 1250-1256. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00109
31.
PageB. I.ShapiroR. Y. (1983). Effects of public opinion on policy. American Political Science Review, 77(1), 175-190. https://doi.org/10.2307/1956018
PickupM.HoboltS. B. (2015). The conditionality of the trade-off between government responsiveness and effectiveness: The impact of minority status and polls in the Canadian House of commons. Electoral Studies, 40, 517-530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2015.07.003
34.
PowellB. (2000). Elections as instruments of democracy: Majoritarian and proportional visions. New Haven: Yale University Press.
35.
RogersS. (2017). Electoral accountability for state legislative roll calls and ideological representation. American Political Science Review, 111(3), 555-571. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055417000156
36.
RogowskiR.KayserM. A. (2002). Majoritarian electoral systems and consumer power: Price-level evidence from the OECD countries. American Journal of Political Science, 46(3), 526-539. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088397
37.
RothsteinB. (2011). The quality of government: Corruption, social trust, and inequality in international perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
