Search results

Previous studies demonstrate that campaigns play an important role in mobilizing citizen participation in elections. The present analysis examines the effects of campaign spending on voter turnout in the state legislative setting where our knowledge of campaign effects is quite limited. In an examination of state legislative elections across 20 states over two election cycles, the analysis considers the influence of candidate spending on voter turnout. The findings demonstrate that campaign spending has a strong influence on voter participation; however, this effect is mitigated by contextual features. Legislative professionalism reduces the influence of spending, while the presence of a high-stimulus statewide election enhances it. In addition, challenger spending is more effective at stimulating participation than incumbent spending. Higher levels of campaign spending increase voter participation in state legislative elections; however, these effects vary according to context. These findings have important implications for theories of participation in American democracy as well for normative issues concerning the role of money in elections. Adapted from the source document.

ObjectivePrevious studies demonstrate that campaigns play an important role in mobilizing citizen participation in elections. The present analysis examines the effects of campaign spending on voter turnout in the state legislative setting where our knowledge of campaign effects is quite limited.MethodIn an examination of state legislative elections across 20 states over two election cycles, the analysis considers the influence of candidate spending on voter turnout.ResultsThe findings demonstrate that campaign spending has a strong influence on voter participation; however, this effect is mitigated by contextual features. Legislative professionalism reduces the influence of spending, while the presence of a high‐stimulus statewide election enhances it. In addition, challenger spending is more effective at stimulating participation than incumbent spending.ConclusionsHigher levels of campaign spending increase voter participation in state legislative elections; however, these effects vary according to context. These findings have important implications for theories of participation in American democracy as well for normative issues concerning the role of money in elections.

Does policy responsiveness on the part of incumbent legislators affect their prospects for reelection? Recent studies of congressional campaigns demonstrate that incumbents who support policies that are more congruent with their constituents' preferences face fewer reelection obstacles. The present analysis considers this question in state legislative elections where voter knowledge of legislator activities is generally quite low. The findings demonstrate that incumbents positioned farther from the average citizen and toward their party's base are only slightly more likely to be challenged than other incumbents. However, more partisan voting incumbents do attract challengers capable of raising and spending larger amounts of money. Interestingly, incumbents positioned closer to their party's base actually receive a greater share of the vote in most contested elections. Only when challengers spend significant amounts of money do we see the positive effects of partisan voting by incumbents diminished. Overall, these findings demonstrate the mechanisms by which policy positions of incumbents in a low‐information environment affect the challengers that emerge and the level of voter support received.

Objective. This analysis examines whether differences exist between women and men state legislators in their roll‐call voting behavior involving matters of economic and regulatory policy.Methods. Using interest group rating scores, I examine the voting behavior of representatives in the lower houses of 28 states in legislative sessions from 1995 to 2000. By controlling for a host of variables related to legislators (political party, years of service, etc.) and their districts (average income, level of education, urbanization, etc.), I am able to isolate the independent effect of gender on roll‐call voting.Results. The findings demonstrate that among Democratic legislators women are less conservative than men, but among Republican lawmakers women are slightly more conservative than men. Additional analyses show that many factors that influence legislative voting by women and men are similar; however, political party has a more prominent effect among women.Conclusion. Although factors such as political party and some constituency characteristics exert a much stronger influence than gender, women and men legislators differ in their roll‐call voting even when controls for a wide assortment of individual‐ and district‐level conditions are taken into account.

Objective. This article will investigate whether candidate gender affects levels of campaign spending in state legislative elections.Methods. The analysis compares men and women candidates running for the state legislature in 20 states over two election cycles. By controlling for a range of contextual factors, the analysis isolates the independent influence of candidate gender.Results. The findings demonstrate that women and men spend similar levels of campaign funding in running for the state legislature. Running as incumbents, challengers, or open‐seat candidates, women are not at a financial disadvantage relative to similarly situated men candidates in the general election.Conclusions. Although women may suffer difficulties at other parts of the electoral process, women are not at a disadvantage relative to men in how much money their campaigns ultimately allocate for the purposes of gaining voter support.

Objective This article will investigate whether candidate gender affects levels of campaign spending in state legislative elections. Methods The analysis compares men and women candidates running for the state legislature in 20 states over two election cycles. By controlling for a range of contextual factors, the analysis isolates the independent influence of candidate gender. Results The findings demonstrate that women and men spend similar levels of campaign funding in running for the state legislature. Running as incumbents, challengers, or open-seat candidates, women are not at a financial disadvantage relative to similarly situated men candidates in the general election. Conclusions Although women may suffer difficulties at other parts of the electoral process, women are not at a disadvantage relative to men in how much money their campaigns ultimately allocate for the purposes of gaining voter support. Adapted from the source document.