Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T15:11:38.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do Term Limits Affect Legislative Roll Call Voting? Representation, Polarization, and Participation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2021

Gerald C. Wright
Gerald C. Wright*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a nationwide survey Carey, Niemi, Powell, and Moncrief (2006) found that term-limited state legislators feel less constrained by their constituencies. I use direct measures of legislative activity to examine how this “Burkean shift” in attitudes is manifested in roll-call behavior. With a new dataset consisting of all competitive state legislative roll calls for the 1999–2000 sessions and a new measure of district constituency preferences, I examine three hypotheses: that term-limited legislators are less representative of their constituents, are more polarized, and participate less in roll-call voting. I find no evidence that term-limited legislators are any less representative, and no differences in levels of party polarization appear associated with the term limits reform. I find that the impact of term limits on roll-call voting is manifested in decreased legislative effort, but this effect only appears in the more demanding legislatures. The results are consistent with the sorting model in which elections are reasonably efficient at selecting leaders whose preferences align with those of their districts, but the prospect of re-election has little role in achieving representation of constituents' ideological preferences.

Type
Research Article
Information
State Politics & Policy Quarterly , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , Fall 2007 , pp. 256 - 280
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association, 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achen, Christopher H. 1977. “Measuring Representation: Perils of the Correlation Coefficient.” American Journal of Political Science 21:805–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alchian, Armen, and Demsetz, Harold. 1972. “Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization.” American Economic Review 62:777–95.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Snyder, James M. Jr., and Stewart, Charles III. 2001. “The Effects of Party and Preferences on Congressional Roll-Call Voting.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 26:533–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Snyder, James M. Jr., and Stewart, Charles III. 2000. “Old Voters, New Voters, and the Personal Vote: Using Redistricting to Measure the Incumbency Advantage.” American Journal of Political Science 44:17–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bender, Bruce, and Lott, John R. Jr. 1996. “Legislator Voting and Shirking: A Critical Review of the Literature.” Public Choice 87:67–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Robert A. 1989. Elections, Representation, and Congressional Voting Behavior: The Myth of Constituency Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Boeckelman, Keith A. 1993. “Term Limitation, Responsiveness, & the Public Interest.” Polity 26:189–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, David W., Cogan, John F., Gaines, Brian J., and Rivers, Douglas. 1996. “The Perils of Presidential Support: How the Republicans Took the House in the 1994 Midterm Elections.” Political Behavior 18:345–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvert, Randall L. 1985. “Robustness of the Multidimensional Voting Model: Candidate Motivations, Uncertainty, and Convergence.” American Journal of Political Science 29:69–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canes-Wrone, Brandice, Brady, David W., and Cogan, John F.. 2002. “Out of Step, Out of Office: Electoral Accountability and House Members' Voting.” American Political Science Review 96:127–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canes-Wrone, Brandice, and Shotts, Kenneth W.. 2004. “The Conditional Nature of Presidential Responsiveness to Public Opinion.” American Journal of Political Science 48:690–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, John M. 1994. “Political Shirking and the Last Term Problem: Evidence for a Party-Administered Pension System.” Public Choice 81:1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, John M. 1996. Term Limits and Legislative Representation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, John M., Niemi, Richard G., and Powell, Lynda W.. 2000. Term Limits in the State Legislatures. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, John M., Niemi, Richard, Powell, Lynda W., and Moncrief, Gary F.. 2006. “The Effects of Term Limits on State Legislatures: A New Survey of the 50 States.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 31:105–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, Jamie L., Crespin, Michael H., Jenkins, Jeffrey A., and Vander Wielen, Ryan J.. 2004. “Shirking in the Contemporary Congress: A Reappraisal.” Political Analysis 12:176–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, Richard T., and Oppenheimer, Joe A.. 1984. “A Method of Estimating the Personal Ideology of Political Representatives.” American Political Science Review 78:163–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E., and Pierce, Roy. 1986. Political Representation in France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Christopher A., and Richardson, Lilliard E. Jr. 2006. “Institutions and Representational Roles in American State Legislatures.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 6:174–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1993. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Otto A., Hinich, Melvin J., and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1970. “An Expository Development of a Mathematical Model of the Electoral Process.” American Political Science Review 64:426–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Elling, Richard C. 1982. “Ideological Change in the U.S. Senate: Time and Electoral Responsiveness.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 7:75–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S. 1972. “Malapportionment, Gerrymandering, and Party Fortunes in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review 66:1234–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S. 1976. “The Relationship between Public Opinion and State Policy: A New Look Based on Some Forgotten Data.” American Journal of Political Science 20:25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S. 1978. “Constituency Opinion and Congressional Behavior: A Reexamination of the Miller-Stokes Representation Data.” American Journal of Political Science 22:511–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., and Wright, Gerald C.. 1980. “Policy Representation of Constituency Interests.” Political Behavior 2:91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., and Wright, Gerald C.. 1985. “Voters, Candidates, and Issues in Congressional Elections.” In Congress Reconsidered, ed. Dodd, Lawrence C. and Oppenheimer, Bruce I.. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., and Wright, Gerald C.. 2005. “Voters, Candidates, and Issues in Congressional Elections.” In Congress Reconsidered, ed. Dodd, Lawrence C. and Oppenheimer, Bruce I.. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., Wright, Gerald C., and McIver, John P.. 1993. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1974. Representatives, Roll Calls, and Constituencies. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1989. Congress, Keystone of the Washington Establishment. 2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Francis, Wayne L., and Kenny, Lawrence W.. 1996. “Position Shifting in Pursuit of Higher Office.” American Journal of Political Science 40:768–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herron, Michael C. 2004. “Studying Dynamics in Legislator Ideal Points: Scale Matters.” Political Analysis 12:182–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbing, John R. 1986. “Ambition in the House: Behavioral Consequences of Higher Office Goals among U.S. Representatives.” American Journal of Political Science 30:651–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Kim Quaile, and Hurley, Patricia A.. 1999. “Dyadic Representation Reappraised.” American Journal of Political Science 43:109–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Kim Quaile, and Hurley, Patricia A.. 2003. “Beyond the Demand-Input Model: A Theory of Representational Linkages.” Journal of Politics 65:304–26.Google Scholar
Jackson, John S. III, Brown, Barbara L., and Bositis, David. 1982. “Herbert McCloskey and Friends Revisited: 1980 Democratic and Republican Party Elites Compared to the Mass Publics.” American Politics Quarterly 10:150–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, Jeffrey A., Crespin, Michael H., and Carson, Jamie L.. 2005. “Parties as Procedural Coalitions in Congress: An Examination of Differing Career Tracks.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 30:365–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jewell, Malcolm E. 1982. Representation in State Legislatures. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press.Google Scholar
Kalt, Joseph P., and Zupan, Mark A.. 1984. “Capture and Ideology in the Economic Theory of Politics.” American Economic Review 74:279–300.Google Scholar
Kalt, Joseph P., and Zupan, Mark. 1990. “The Apparent Ideological Behavior of Legislators: Testing for Principal-Agent Slack in Political Institutions.” Journal of Law & Economics 33:103–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, V. O. Jr. 1949. Southern Politics in State and Nation. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.Google Scholar
Kuklinski, James H. 1978. “Representativeness and Elections: A Policy Analysis.” American Political Science Review 72:165–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurfirst, Robert. 1996. “Term-Limit Logic: Paradigms and Paradoxes.” Polity 29:119–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, Eric D., Maltzman, Forrest, and Smith, Steven S.. 2006. “Who Wins? Party Effects in Legislative Voting.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 31:33–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levendusky, Matthew S., Pope, Jeremy C., and Jackman, Simon. 2005. “Measuring District Level Preferences with Implications for the Analysis of U.S. Elections.” Paper read at Annual Meeting of the Society for Political Methodology, Tallahassee, FL.Google Scholar
Lott, John R. Jr. 1987. “Political Cheating.” Public Choice 52:169–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lott, John R. Jr., and Robert Reed, W.. 1989. “Shirking and Sorting in a Political Market with Finite-Lived Politicians.” Public Choice 61:75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maestas, Cherie. 2000. “Professional Legislatures and Ambitious Politicians: Policy Responsiveness of State Institutions.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 25:663–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maestas, Cherie. 2003. “The Incentive to Listen: Progressive Ambition, Resources, and Opinion Monitoring among State Legislators.” Journal of Politics 65:439–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malbin, Michael J. 1992. “Federalists and Antifederalists: The Term-Limitation Debate at the Founding.” In Limiting Legislative Terms, ed. Benjamin, Gerald and Malbin, Michael J.. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
McClosky, Herbert, Hoffmann, Paul J., and O'Hara, Rosemary. 1960. “Issue Conflict and Consensus among Party Leaders and Followers.” The American Political Science Review 54:406–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E., Kent Jennings, M., and Farah, Barbara G.. 1986. Parties in Transition: A Longitudinal Study of Party Elites and Party Supporters. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E.. 1963. “Constituency Influence in Congress.” American Political Science Review 57:45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nice, David C. 1983. “Representation in the States: Policy-Making and Ideology.” Social Science Quarterly 64:404–11.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., Shapiro, Robert Y., Gronke, Paul W., and Rosenberg, Robert M.. 1984. “Constituency, Party, and Representation in Congress.” Public Opinion Quarterly 48:741–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petracca, Mark P. 1993. “A New Defense of State-Imposed Congressional Term Limits.” PS: Political Science and Politics 26:700–5.Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1984. “The Polarization of American Politics.” The Journal of Politics 46:1061–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, Lawrence S., and Sanders, Mitchell. 1999. “Attendance Rates, Political Shirking, and the Effect of Post-Elective Office Employment.” Economics and Politics 11:311–40.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, Lawrence S., and Sanders, Mitchell S.. 2000. “Severing the Electoral Connection: Shirking in the Contemporary Congress.” American Journal of Political Science 44:316–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarbaugh-Thompson, Marjorie, Thompson, Lyke, Elder, Charles D., and Strate, John. 2004. Political and Institutional Effects of Term Limits. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlesinger, Joseph A. 1966. Ambition and Politics: Political Careers in the United States. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Schwarz, John E., and Fenmore, Barton. 1977. “Presidential Election Results and Congressional Roll Call Behavior: The Cases of 1964, 1968, and 1972.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 2:409–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squire, Peverill. 1992. “Legislative Professionalization and Membership Diversity in State Legislatures.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 17:69–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squire, Peverill. 2000. “Uncontested Seats in State Legislative Elections.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 25:131–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Walter J. 1979. “Measuring Constituency-Representative Linkages - Problems and Prospects.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 4:623–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stonecash, Jeffrey M., Brewer, Mark D., and Mariani, Mack D.. 2003. Diverging Parties: Social Change, Realignment, and Party Polarization. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Struble, Robert Jr., and Jahre, Z. W.. 1991. “Rotation in Office: Rapid but Restricted to the House.” PS: Political Science and Politics 24:34–7.Google Scholar
Sullivan, John L., and Minns, Daniel Richard. 1976. “Ideological Distance between Candidates: An Empirical Examination.” American Journal of Political Science 20:439–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Martin. 1985. “Election Proximity and Senatorial Roll Call Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 29:96–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Will, George F. 1992. Restoration: Congress, Term Limits, and the Recovery of Deliberative Democracy. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Wittman, Donald A. 1995. The Myth of Democratic Failure: Why Political Institutions Are Efficient. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Wright, Gerald C., and Berkman, Michael B.. 1986. “Candidates and Policy in United States Senate Elections.” American Political Science Review 80:567–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Gerald C., Osborn, Tracy, and Winburn, Jon. 2004. “Patterns of Roll Call Voting in America's Legislatures.” Paper read at Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Wright, Gerald C., and Schaffner, Brian F.. 2002. “The Influence of Party: Evidence from the State Legislatures.” American Political Science Review 96:367–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zupan, Mark A. 1990. “The Last-Period Problem in Politics: Do Congressional Representatives Not Subject to a Reelection Constraint Alter Their Voting Behavior?” Public Choice 65:167–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar