[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v42y2022i4p637-655_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Messaging, policy and “credible” votes: do members of Congress vote differently when policy is on the line?

Author

Listed:
  • Gray, Thomas R.
  • Jenkins, Jeffery A.
Abstract
Many recorded roll calls in Congress each year are votes on bills that have no chance of becoming law, or are purely symbolic, or are procedural without policy content. Yet models of voting and measurement models of member preferences make assumptions that vote choices are largely about utility derived from policies. We consider the possibility that votes plausibly connected to policy and votes not plausibly connected to policy may have different data-generating processes and rely on different utility functions. Substantively, similarity across different contexts for policy change implies an importance of messaging over policy. Methodologically, similarity across these contexts is necessary to avoid biasing estimates of member preferences. We find that members’ voting patterns are highly stable across contexts in which policy change is credible and not credible. This indicates that existing measures of ideal points are likely not dramatically biased by the inclusion of policy-irrelevant votes.

Suggested Citation

  • Gray, Thomas R. & Jenkins, Jeffery A., 2022. "Messaging, policy and “credible” votes: do members of Congress vote differently when policy is on the line?," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(4), pages 637-655, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:42:y:2022:i:4:p:637-655_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X2200006X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:42:y:2022:i:4:p:637-655_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.