Political Research Quarterly

Assessment of proposals to limit legislative terms has been restricted, and thus muddled, by a dearth of empirical data. Absent hard evidence, an abundance of often contradictory speculation has emerged, further cloud ing the term limits debate. This paper offers a simple mathematical model in an effort to construct a sound analytic framework for examination of the possible effects of terms limits on the composition of the U.S. House. The model treats elections as filters, or mechanisms with which voters strive to differentiate among candidates on the basis of quality. The analysis demonstrates that term limits will produce a substantial reduction in the quality of the U.S. House under baseline conditions. Terms limits also are associated with a decline in the quality of the House in a majority of alter native conditions, and the average magnitude of that decline is substantial.

This article investigates the experience of independent presidential candi date H. Ross Perot by drawing on historical explanations for third party success. Studies of third party candidates have isolated a series of contex tual factors that contribute to electoral success. They include low levels of partisanship, dissatisfaction with the major party candidates, issue aliena tion, economic discontent, and distrust toward government. Using NES data, the author tests these models as explanations for Perot's success in 1992 and compares the results to previous third party experiences in 1968 and 1980. The author finds that the existence of a large base of weak parti sans was a major determinant of Perot's electoral breakthrough but that none of the other factors served as a powerful explanation for Perot's suc cess, especially when compared to the experiences of previous third party candidates.

We attempt to bridge the conceptual gap between the black politics and state politics literatures by studying the effect of racial differences in elec toral participation on public policy. If state politics has considered whether "voters matter," and black politics has asked whether "black elected officials matter," we attempt to determine if "black voters matter." In particular, we ask whether, and how, the racial composition of the electorate affects state policies. Our results suggest that the greater black participation relative to that of whites, the less liberal are state policies. The implications for democratic theory and black politics are discussed.

This paper explores the determinants of invalid ballots and abstention in the world's largest electorate subject to compulsory voting. Previous analysts have seen blank and spoiled ballots either as an expression of po litical protest or as a product of the social structure. To these interpreta tions we add the hypothesis that invalid voting can be caused by institutional factors. In studying twelve legislative elections in Brazil be tween 1945 and 1990, we find that for each of three dependent variables considered (invalid votes for both houses of Congress, and noncompliant abstention), a model incorporating political, socioeconomic, and institu tional factors is more powerful than a model relying on any one of these alone. We also provide evidence that Brazil's unusual system of open-list proportional representation generates institutional features which serve as barriers impeding the effective incorporation of newly enfranchised voters. The extraordinarily high rates of invalid balloting in recent Brazilian elec tions point to the necessity of institutional reform in order to achieve democratic consolidation, with important implications for other new democracies.

Rational choice theory has yet to provide a satisfactory explanation of voter turnout. One such account, minimax regret, is analyzed using data from a survey involving students at two Canadian universities during the 1993 Canadian federal election campaign. While the minimax regret hypothesis is supported at the bivariate level, it fails to pass a multivariate test in which other components of the calculus of voting are included. Minimax regret appears to be little more than a rationalization on the part of those having a strong sense of duty to vote.

This study examines the collective voting behavior of the United States Supreme Court in civil rights and liberties decisions for the 1986-87 through the 1991-92 terms to determine if the Court has become signifi cantly more conservative and, if changes have occurred, to determine the reasons for these changes. Despite the efforts of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush to pack the Court with judicial conservatives, the Re hnquist Court during this period was more liberal in its voting behavior than the Burger Court was in its last decade. Membership change, changes in the voting behavior of continuing members of the Court, and issue change all appear to have influenced the collective voting of the Rehnquist Court, with the result that the Court has not been as conservative as liber als had feared and conservatives had anticipated.

In this study we examine how party controlled redistricting in 1991-92 affected the fortunes of U.S. House incumbents in the 1992 election. We explore the strategic differences between the partisan redistricting plans implemented unilaterally by one party, and the bipartisan plans im plemented as the result of party compromise, arguing that effective analysis of incumbency advantage requires distinction between these two types of plans as well as distinction between the plans of states that gain seats, states that lose seats, and states that remain unchanged in reapportion ment. We then assess incumbency advantage under the partisan and bipartisan plans by comparing incumbent displacement rates under these plans with the displacement rates under politically neutral nonpartisan dis tricting plans. Our findings indicate that incumbents do indeed benefit from party controlled redistricting and more so under bipartisan than un der partisan redistricting. They also indicate that the gain or loss of seats from reapportionment influences substantially the consequences of redis tricting for incumbents.

Using data from the 1994 and earlier National Election Studies, this essay examines the causes and consequences of the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives and its implications for research on congression al elections. The dramatic Republican gains in the 1994 midterm election appear to reflect long-term shifts in the partisan and ideological loyalties of the U.S. electorate and not just short-term issues that favored the GOP Between 1990 and 1994, the American electorate became increasingly Republican and increasingly conservative while the Democratic party was perceived as increasingly liberal. Democrats will probably find it difficult to regain most of the seats that the party lost in 1994 because Republican identifiers outnumber Democratic identifiers by a wide margin in these districts. The era of Democratic domination may be giving way to a new era of intense competition for control of the House of Representatives. In light of these developments, more research is needed on the extent and consequences of partisan and ideological realignment in the U.S. electorate, variability among congressional contests, and the effects of congressional campaigns on voter decision making.

In this field essay I summarize recent findings on congressional elections with an eye toward identifying the gaps, contradictions, and questions that still remain. I organize the discussion around three related topics: candi dates, campaign finance, and voters. I examine our understanding of who runs and who does not run for Congress, and raise questions about the notion of challenger quality and how it has been measured. My focus then shifts to a discussion of the effects of money in congressional elections, highlighting unresolved questions about the influence of incumbent spending on election outcomes. I then examine the literature on voters in congressional elections, bringing together work that ties candidates and campaigns to their effects on individual voting decisions. I then conclude the essay by discussing how different research approaches might advance our understanding of congressional elections.