Suchergebnisse

Objectives Although public opinion generally is opposed to tax increases, voters frequently choose to raise their own taxes in property tax cap override elections. This study sought to uncover the factors that are associated with successful attempts to increase local property taxes. Methods This phenomenon was studied in Massachusetts towns, where over 1,200 overrides were successful from 1990 to 2007. Multivariate analysis was used to assess the relative importance of variables related to two theoretical perspectives: voting as utility maximization and voting as symbolic action. Results The results show that override support reflects the fiscal condition of the town, the context of the particular override request, and, most importantly, the socioeconomics of the community. Overrides were more successful in communities that had higher levels of education, lower levels of affluence, and smaller nonwhite populations. In addition, overrides were more successful in towns with lower existing tax rates and where the particular override was less salient and narrower in scope. Conclusions On balance, the results are supportive of a symbolic theory of override voting in which voters are expressing their general views about government, rather than choosing in a way reflective of individual utility maximization. Adapted from the source document.

ObjectivesAlthough public opinion generally is opposed to tax increases, voters frequently choose to raise their own taxes in property tax cap override elections. This study sought to uncover the factors that are associated with successful attempts to increase local property taxes.MethodsThis phenomenon was studied in Massachusetts towns, where over 1,200 overrides were successful from 1990 to 2007. Multivariate analysis was used to assess the relative importance of variables related to two theoretical perspectives: voting as utility maximization and voting as symbolic action.ResultsThe results show that override support reflects the fiscal condition of the town, the context of the particular override request, and, most importantly, the socioeconomics of the community. Overrides were more successful in communities that had higher levels of education, lower levels of affluence, and smaller nonwhite populations. In addition, overrides were more successful in towns with lower existing tax rates and where the particular override was less salient and narrower in scope.ConclusionsOn balance, the results are supportive of a symbolic theory of override voting in which voters are expressing their general views about government, rather than choosing in a way reflective of individual utility maximization.

Intro -- Contents -- List of Tables and Figures -- Tables -- Figures -- Acknowledgments -- Chapter 1: Party Organizations in Their Environment -- A Changing Political Landscape -- Organizational Evolution -- Party Organizers and the Party Exchange -- Innovation and Adaptation -- Conclusion: Local Parties in the 21st Century -- Chapter 2: Connections and Cooperation in the State Party Confederacy -- Survey of Local Party Chairs -- Assistance from the State Party -- Political Party Organizational Culture -- Cultural Differences between Democrats and Republicans -- Cultural Difference within Parties and States -- Conclusion: State Party Influence on Local Parties -- Chapter 3: Organizational Structure and Activity at the Local Level -- Organizational Form at the Local Level: Patterns of Structure and Activity -- Organizational Form and the Environment -- Multilevel Model Specification -- Modeling Local Party Structure -- Modeling Local Party Activity -- Conclusion: State and Local Environments -- Chapter 4: The Electoral Payoff -- Analyzing the Effects of Party Activity -- Different Activities, Different Effects -- Conclusion: The Continued Utility of Local Parties -- Chapter 5: The Future of Local Party Organizations -- Purposive Benefits and Party Activity -- Money and Local Party Organizations -- Conclusion: The Future of Local Parties -- Appendix: Local Party Chair Survey -- Survey Responses -- Measuring Party Organizational Culture -- Survey Instrument -- Notes -- References -- Index.

AbstractObjectivePrevailing theories posit some party activists are amateurs, driven primarily by purposive benefits, while other activists are professionals, motivated mostly by material benefits. The decline of patronage and the rise of polarization suggest re‐examining the relevancy of this distinction.MethodsThe study uses data from a 2019 survey of 1,060 local party chairs in the United States, covering 49 states.ResultsMost respondents are motivated by purposive benefits, while career motivations are relatively rare. Those who do derive material benefits are only slightly more centrist than their peers and are no more pragmatic and no less likely to derive purposive benefits. A substantial segment of local chairs are interested in seeking elective office, but the motivations of these individuals with ambitions connected to party activism are dominated by purposive benefits as much as those of the unambitious.ConclusionThe study demonstrates the professional–amateur typology no longer accurately characterizes local party activists.

Objectives. Conventional wisdom about the link between campaign contributions and roll call votes is that contributions rarely matter because groups tend to give to like‐minded legislators. This meta‐analysis examines the conventional wisdom by analyzing published research on this topic.Methods. More than 30 studies are pooled to produce more than 350 individual tests of the contributions‐roll call link. Extending meta‐regression (Stanley and Jarrell, 1989), a logit meta‐analysis is conducted to summarize the literature and assess the importance of various modeling choices.Results. We find that some, but not all, model specifications have an impact on whether significant results are present. Models that control for friendly giving by including a measure of legislators' ideology and that include more than one contributions variable are less likely to produce significant results.Conclusions. After considering the impact of model choice on study results, we conclude that one‐third of roll call votes exhibit the impact of campaign contributions.