移动选举标杆:美国州和地方的选举干预战略

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Electoral Studies Pub Date : 2024-03-20 DOI:10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102771
Galen Sheely
{"title":"移动选举标杆:美国州和地方的选举干预战略","authors":"Galen Sheely","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Central to the partisan divide in American politics is disagreement over the fundamental legitimacy of American elections. Due to the decentralized nature of election administration in the US, these disagreements have led to a complex web of heterogeneous electoral institutions. Scholars have made impressive progress on untangling the effects of these different institutions — unfortunately, less is known about the sources of adoption of such proposals. Using time-series cross-sectional data on the adoption of various electoral policies by state governments from 2001–2018, I examine the role of politics and identity in shaping the types of electoral interventions adopted by state legislatures during an important period of increasing politicization of such interventions. Applying dynamic panel models and constructing a novel measure of the concentration of Black population within competitive congressional districts, I find that the effects of race, competition, and ideology on electoral interventions differ across both partisan lines and issue areas.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48188,"journal":{"name":"Electoral Studies","volume":"88 ","pages":"Article 102771"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moving the electoral goalposts: State and local strategies of electoral intervention in the U.S.\",\"authors\":\"Galen Sheely\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102771\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Central to the partisan divide in American politics is disagreement over the fundamental legitimacy of American elections. Due to the decentralized nature of election administration in the US, these disagreements have led to a complex web of heterogeneous electoral institutions. Scholars have made impressive progress on untangling the effects of these different institutions — unfortunately, less is known about the sources of adoption of such proposals. Using time-series cross-sectional data on the adoption of various electoral policies by state governments from 2001–2018, I examine the role of politics and identity in shaping the types of electoral interventions adopted by state legislatures during an important period of increasing politicization of such interventions. Applying dynamic panel models and constructing a novel measure of the concentration of Black population within competitive congressional districts, I find that the effects of race, competition, and ideology on electoral interventions differ across both partisan lines and issue areas.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48188,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Electoral Studies\",\"volume\":\"88 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102771\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Electoral Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379424000295\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electoral Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379424000295","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国政治中党派分歧的核心是对美国选举基本合法性的分歧。由于美国选举管理的分散性,这些分歧导致了复杂的异质选举制度网络。学者们在揭示这些不同制度的影响方面取得了令人瞩目的进展--遗憾的是,人们对采纳这些建议的来源却知之甚少。笔者利用 2001-2018 年各州政府采取各种选举政策的时间序列横截面数据,考察了在选举干预日益政治化的重要时期,政治和身份认同在影响州立法机构采取选举干预类型中的作用。我运用动态面板模型,并构建了一种新的衡量标准来衡量竞争性国会选区内黑人人口的集中程度,结果发现种族、竞争和意识形态对选举干预措施的影响在党派和议题领域都有所不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Moving the electoral goalposts: State and local strategies of electoral intervention in the U.S.

Central to the partisan divide in American politics is disagreement over the fundamental legitimacy of American elections. Due to the decentralized nature of election administration in the US, these disagreements have led to a complex web of heterogeneous electoral institutions. Scholars have made impressive progress on untangling the effects of these different institutions — unfortunately, less is known about the sources of adoption of such proposals. Using time-series cross-sectional data on the adoption of various electoral policies by state governments from 2001–2018, I examine the role of politics and identity in shaping the types of electoral interventions adopted by state legislatures during an important period of increasing politicization of such interventions. Applying dynamic panel models and constructing a novel measure of the concentration of Black population within competitive congressional districts, I find that the effects of race, competition, and ideology on electoral interventions differ across both partisan lines and issue areas.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Electoral Studies
Electoral Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Electoral Studies is an international journal covering all aspects of voting, the central act in the democratic process. Political scientists, economists, sociologists, game theorists, geographers, contemporary historians and lawyers have common, and overlapping, interests in what causes voters to act as they do, and the consequences. Electoral Studies provides a forum for these diverse approaches. It publishes fully refereed papers, both theoretical and empirical, on such topics as relationships between votes and seats, and between election outcomes and politicians reactions; historical, sociological, or geographical correlates of voting behaviour; rational choice analysis of political acts, and critiques of such analyses.
期刊最新文献
Does disability affect support for political parties? Economic growth, largest-party vote shares, and electoral authoritarianism Targeting voters online: How parties’ campaigns differ Masking turnout inequality. Invalid voting and class bias when compulsory voting is reinstated Does decentralization boost electoral participation? Revisiting the question in a non-western context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1