In this study the authors assess the relationship between economic conditions and results from state ballot proposition elections in California. They propose that voters are less likely to adopt policies in the context of poor economic conditions. Aggregate results demonstrate that adverse economic conditions are associated with greater negative voting on propositions. Models estimated with state and national economic indicators illustrate that voting is conditioned by the state economy more than the national economy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ansolabehere, S., and S. Iyengar.1993. Information and electoral attitudes: A case of judgement under uncertainty. In Explorations in Political Psychology, edited by S. Iyengar and W. McGuire.Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
2.
Bain, H.M., and D. Hecock.1957. Ballot position and voter's choice. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
3.
Bates, Robert.1988Toward a political economy of development. Berkeley: University of California Press.
4.
Bowler, S., and T. Donovan.1993. Information and opinion change on ballot propositions. Paper presented at the meeting of the Western Political Science Association, Pasadena, CA .
5.
Bowler, S., T. Donovan, and T. Happ.1992. Ballot propositions and information costs: Direct democracy and the fatigued voter. Western Political Quarterly45:559-68.
6.
Bone, Hugh, and Robert Benedict .1975. Perspectives on direct legislation . Western Political Quarterly28:30-51.
7.
Brady, H., and S. Ansolabehere .1989. The nature of utility functions in mass publics. American Political Science Review83:142-63.
8.
Campbell, Angus.1960. Surge and decline: A study in electoral change. Public Opinion Quarterly24:397-418.
9.
Chubb, John.1988. Institutions, the economy and the dynamics of state elections . American Political Science Review82:133-52.
10.
Downs, Anthony.1957. An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper.
11.
Government in California: Buckling Under the Strain. 1993. Economist, February 13, 21-23.
12.
Holbrook, Thomas.1991. Presidential elections in time and space. American Journal of Political Science35:91-109.
13.
Howell, Susan, and James Vanderleeuw .1990. Economic effects on state governors. American Politics Quarterly18:158-68.
14.
Jervis, R.1993. The drunkard's search. In Explorations in Political Psychology, edited by S. Iyengar and W. McGuire.Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
15.
Kramer, Gerald H.1971. Short-term fluctuations in U.S. voting behavior: 1896-1964 . American Political Science Review65:131-43.
16.
Lau, R.1985. Two explanations for negativity effects in political behavior . American Journal of Political Science29:119-38.
17.
Lewis-Beck, Michael.1990. Economics and elections: The major western democracies . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
18.
Lupia, Arthur.1992. Busy voters, agenda control, and the power of information . American Political Science Review86:390-403.
19.
Magleby, David.1984. Direct legislation: Voting on ballot propositions in the United States. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
20.
Mueller, Dennis.1989. Public choice II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
Mueller, John.1969. Voting on the propositions: Ballot patterns and historical trends in California. American Political Science Review63:1197-1212.
22.
Peltzman, Sam.1987. Economic conditions and gubernatorial elections. American Economic Review77:293-7.
23.
Pindyck, Robert, and Daniel Rubinfeld .1981. Economic models and economic forecasts. New York: McGraw-Hill .
24.
Quattrone, G., and A. Tversky.1988. Contrasting rational and psychological analyses of political choice. American Political Science Review82:719-36.
25.
Stein, Robert.1990. Economic voting for governor and U.S. Senator: The electoral consequences of federalism. Journal of Politics52:29-53.
