Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Partisan Priorities ONLINE SUPPLEMENTARY APPENDIX
Transcript
Partisan Priorities How Issue Ownership Drives and Distorts American Politics Patrick J. Egan January 2013 ONLINE SUPPLEMENTARY APPENDIX Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 1 Chapter 2 A. Spending Preferences Survey Items in the GSS: Question wording and calculation of aggregate preferences As noted in the text, the GSS asks respondents’ preferences over national spending using the following question stem: We are faced with many problems in this country, none of which can be solved easily or inexpensively. I'm going to name some of these problems, and for each one I'd like you to name some of these problems, and for each one I'd like you to tell me whether you think we're spending too much money on it, too little money, or about the right amount. First (READ ITEM A) . . . are we spending too much, too little, or about the right amount on (ITEM)? All of the GSS items analyzed in this book are listed below. For many issues, the GSS uses two slightly different question wordings that it substitutes for ITEM in the stem above; survey respondents are assigned at random to one of the two wordings. Where this is the case, both question wordings are listed. These wordings have the same substantive meanings and did not affect responses to a substantial degree. Thus they were averaged in the calculations of aggregate preferences. Issue Crime Drugs Education Energy Environment Health care Military Poverty Social security GSS Mnemonic NATCRIME/NATCRIMY NATDRUG/NATDRUGY NATEDUC/NATEDUCY NATENRGY NATENVIR/NATENVIY NATHEAL/NATHEALY NATARMS/NATARMSY NATFAREY NATSOC Question wording Halting the rising crime rate/Law enforcement Dealing with drug addiction/Drug rehabilitation Improving the nation's education system/Education Developing alternative energy sources Improving and protecting the environment/Environment Improving and protecting the nation's health/health The military, armaments, and defense/National defense Assistance to the poor Social security Non-consensus issues included in analysis in Chapter 6: Issue GSS Mnemonic Cities Foreign aid Parks Science Space Transportation NATCITY/NATCITYY NATAID/NATAIDY NATPARK NATSCI NATSPACE, NATSPACY NATMASS Question wording Solving the problems of the big cities/Assistance to big cities Foreign aid/Assistance to other countries Parks and recreation Supporting scientific research Space exploration program Mass transportation Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 2 Chapter 3 B. List of search terms and issue categories for issue ownership survey questions As described in the text, all issue ownership questions found in the Roper Archive were included in the analyses generating the over-time estimates of issue ownership on consensus issues found in Table 3.2. The following tables list the categories into which issue ownership questions were classified. It first lists those classified as consensus issues and then those classified as non-consensus issues, with the reason for their classification as such. Consensus issues included in analysis issue categories search term crime crime crime deficit deficit deficit deficit domestic security domestic security domestic security domestic security domestic security domestic security domestic security domestic security domestic security domestic security domestic security economy economy economy economy economy economy economy economy economy economy economy economy education education energy energy energy crime drug (NOT prescription drugs) violence debt deficit fiscal discipline fiscal responsibility america safe border security communists defend feel safe homeland security mass destruction national security protecting the country security (NOT social security) terror depression economic economy factories to produce more financial investment live better peacetime production prosperous recession savings and loan stock market educat school energy foreign oil foreign oil Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 3 issue categories search term energy energy energy environment environment foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military gas and oil gas prices gasoline enviro pollution alliances allies allies around the word american interests arms control at peace china control nuclear weapons foreign affairs foreign countries foreign leaders foreign nations foreign policy foreign relations free-enterprise economies global respect international affairs international drug trafficking keeping the peace lasting peace nuclear arms nuclear weapons other countries out of war peace peace in the world respect for the united states respected in the world SALT south africa spread of democracy standing in the world third world trade world affairs world peace world war iii japan afghanistan arab Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 4 issue categories search term foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military foreign affairs, military health care health care healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare healthcare immigration immigration immigration, domestic security inflation inflation inflation inflation inflation inflation jobs jobs jobs jobs military military military military central america iran iraq israel korea kosovo middle east nicaragua North Korea palestin persian gulf russia soviet vietnam malpractice prescription health care health insurance health of the people healthcare health-care HMO malpractice medical Medicare patient's bill patients' rights prescription immigrant immigration border cost of living food prices high prices inflation interest rates prices down job unemploy unemployment wages america strong defense intelligence militarily Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 5 issue categories search term military poverty poverty poverty poverty poverty social security taxes taxes trade trade military homeless poor poverty welfare welfare social security internal revenue service tax more competitive abroad trade Consensus issues not included in analysis due to lack of observations issue category AIDS food parks research technology technology transportation search term aids food safety national parks research internet technology roads Non-consensus issues, with reason for classification as non-consensus issue Refers to desired characteristics of parties or candidates issue category accomplish accomplish accomplish accomplish accomplish accomplish accomplish accomplish accomplish accomplish accomplish choices commander community compassion confidence search term business of government changing how things work in washington effective leadership government efficiently gridlock managing the federal government managing the government relations with congress solutions willing to work with work with other party choices commander communit compassion confidence from the people Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 6 issue category confidence crisis disasters ethics ethics ethics ethics ethics ethics ethics ethics experience freedom future general general general general general giveback ideas leader likeyou likeyou likeyou opportunity patriotism patriotism patriotism patriotism principled principled reform responsibility specialints specialints waste search term confidence in government crisis disaster bribery corrupt ethic free from graft honest open government trust in the government violate the law experienced freedom future future ideas main problems right choices right policies give something back new ideas leadership on your side people like me people like you opportunity patriotic pledge of allegiance proud to be americans traditional american values campaign promises what they believe reform responsibility elites special interests waste Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 7 Refers to constituency groups issue category business business business business children consumer disabled family family farmers homeowners homeowners housing housing housing investors investors investors investors investors labor labor labor middleclass middleclass middleclass minorities minorities minorities minorities minorities minorities minorities minorities minorities seniors seniors upperclass urban urban veteran women women youth search term business companies corporat small businesses children consumer disabilities families family farm homeowner mortage homeowner housing mortgage investment retirement stock market stockholders wall street labor strikes working people middle class middle income middle-class affirmative action black people civil rights colored people minorities minority race relations racial whites and negroes elderly retire wealthy big cities urban veterans sexual harassment women young people Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 8 Fails the ceteris paribus criterion issue category abortion affirmaction budget civilrights court court deathpenalty gayrights gayrights gayrights gayrights guncontrol inequality media morality morality prayer protests rights rights rights sandl socialprograms spending spending spending stemcell stemcell tobacco vouchers search term abortion affirmative action budget civil rights judicial supreme court death penalty gay homosex same sex marriage same-sex marriage gun inequality violence in the media moral values school prayer protests constitutional rights privacy rights of individual savings and loan social programs government expense government expenses spending stem cell stem-cell tobacco school vouchers Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 9 C. Issue Ownership on Consensus Issues, 1972-2010 (Robustness Check for Table 3.2 using Macropartisanship and Policy Mood Variables) Net percentages of Americans saying that Republicans can do a better job Issue 1970s domestic security military crime immigration inflation trade foreign affairs taxes deficit economy energy education social security jobs health care environment poverty adjusted R-squared: in full model in model without issue indicator terms N: 16.2*** 3.3 19.9*** 4.8 8.1* 2.6 -0.3 4.2 9.4** -16.1* -10.7 -5.6 -20.6*** 1980s 27.1*** 14.7*** 3.8 8.9*** 20.6*** 0.5 4.0* 5.5* 3.4 9.2*** 2.2 -10.3*** -20.4*** -11.9*** -8.5 -16.8*** -35.3*** 1990s 13.8* 24.6*** 6.2*** 15.4*** 15.0*** 0.8 16.2*** 8.3*** 6.4*** 1.6 -12.0*** -9.5*** -12.3*** -17.2*** -19.4*** -14.4*** 2000s 16.2*** 11.6*** 9.9*** 2.9* -2.1 13.9*** -3.8** 3.0*** -0.4 -2.7*** -10.3*** -5.1*** -8.3*** -5.4*** -13.1*** -22.2*** -10.6* .36 .46 .46 .53 .22 147 .04 873 .03 1,491 .10 3,435 average 18.6*** 12.5*** 9.5*** 7.6*** 7.5 5.5** 4.9*** 4.1** 2.6* 1.1 -3.7 -7.1** -11.5*** -12.6*** -16.5*** -18.0*** -19.6*** 5,946 Estimates are derived from the coefficients on issue indicator terms in the following equation generating estimates from ownership questions asked about issues i in year j by polling firm p: ( %REP − %DEM ) i 17 i j = β i issue i ∑ i =1 + δ 1macropartisanship j + δ 2mood j + φ1nominee + φ2 pres _ cong + φ3thirdparty + ∑ λp firm p + ε , p Source for macropartisanship: General Social Survey cumulative file (annual % of Americans identifying as Republicans – % identifying as Democrats; missing values supplied via linear interpolation). Data available from 1972 through 2010. Source for public mood: James Stimson’s website (http://www.unc.edu/~cogginse/Policy_Mood_files/Mood.2.13.12.xls), accessed January 7, 2013. Cells are left blank where lack of adequate data precludes estimation. Estimates significantly different from zero at +p<.10; *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001 (two-tailed tests, robust standard errors). Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 10 Chapter 4 D. ANES Variable Numbers for Self-Placement Items on Policy Scales year question ANES var # year question ANES var # 1970 1970 crime vs rights govt action on inflation V700120 V700113 1986 1986 central america defense spending V860428 V860405 1970 1970 1970 1970 health insurance plan pollution campus unrest urban unrest V700134 V700127 V700099 V700085 1988 1988 1988 1988 defense spending get along with russia guaranteed job health insurance plan V880310 V880368 V880323 V880318 1970 vietnam V700092 1990 defense spending V900439 1972 1972 campus unrest crime vs rights V720678 V720621 1992 1992 defense spending guaranteed job V923707 V923718 1972 1972 govt action on inflation guaranteed job V720190 V720172 1994 1994 guaranteed job health insurance plan V940930 V940950 1972 1972 1972 1972 health insurance plan tax rates urban unrest vietnam V720208 V720178 V720670 V720184 1996 1996 1996 1996 crime defense spending environment/regulation guaranteed job V960519 V960463 V960537 V960483 1974 guaranteed job V742265 1996 health insurance plan V960479 1974 urban unrest V742273 1998 environment/regulation V980497 1976 1976 1976 crime vs rights guaranteed job health insurance plan V763248 V763241 V763273 2000 2000 2000 defense spending environment/regulation guaranteed job V000581 V000771 V000615 1976 1976 tax rates urban unrest V763779 V763767 2002 2002 Bush tax cuts estate tax V023077x V025135 1978 1978 1978 crime vs rights guaranteed job health insurance plan V780365 V780357 V780381 2004 2004 2004 defense spending diplomacy/military force guaranteed job V043142 V045124 V043152 1980 1980 1980 1980 defense spending get along with russia guaranteed job tax cuts V800281 V801078 V801110 V800323 2008 2008 2008 2008 defense spending emissions standards guaranteed job health insurance plan V083112 V083157x V083128 V083119 1982 defense spending V820407 2008 universal health care V083124x 1982 guaranteed job V820425 1984 1984 1984 1984 central america defense spending get along with russia guaranteed job V840388 V840395 V840408 V840414 Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 11 E. Control of the Presidency and Congress and Change in National Conditions, 1975-2010 (Robustness Check for Table 4.6 incorporating Congressional control) Indicator Long-run effect of Democratic control – Republican control multiplier estimated with error correction models) estimate Improved more under G.O.P. GDP (% change) p-value -1.43 (.31) <.01 Murders (per 100,000 population) .66 (.32) .04 Taxes (Effective rate paid by median household) .36 (.21) .08 Poverty (% below poverty line) 5.87 (3.90) .13 Inflation (% change in CPI) 1.88 (1.26) .14 Violent crimes (per 100,000 population) .33 (.27) .22 Uninsured (%) .73 (.62) .24 -5.39 (4.69) .25 5.89 (6.15) .34 Carbon monoxide emissions (thousand short tons) 8820.42 (16863.98) .60 Self-reported health status (% “excellent”/ “good”) -.16 (1.28) .90 45589.19 (11000000.00) 1.00 College attainment (% of 25-year-olds with degree) .09 (.57) .88 Support for U.S. at U.N. (-1 to 1 scale) .54 (1.16) .64 -.69 (.99) .48 -1.24 (1.58) .43 Reading scores (% of 13-year-olds w/ basic skills) .59 (.24) .01 Exports of goods and services (as % of GDP) .99 (.35) <.01 Budget surplus or deficit (as % of GDP) Unemployment (%) Greenhouse gas emissions (Tg CO2 Eq.) Improved more under Democrats se Unauthorized immigrants living in U.S. (millions) Energy prices (dollars per million BTU) Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 12 F. Change in National Conditions, Control of the Presidency and Congress, and Issue Ownership (Robustness Check for Figure 4.5 incorporating Congressional control) Correct classifications: dark circles; incorrect classifications: hollow circles Republican ownership advantage on associated issue (percentage points) LONG-RUN CHANGE 20 10 inflation murder violent crime unauthorized immigration median federal tax rate surplus/deficit 0 support for U.S. at U.N. U.S. exports GDP energy prices -10 college attainment reading test scores unemploymentself-reported health status % uninsured greenhouse emissions gas emissions poverty ratecarbon monoxide -20 .05 .50 1.00 .50 .05 improvement in condition under Republicans improvement under Democrats (p-value of estimate) Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 13 Chapter 5 G. Coding of Most Important Problem Verbatim Answers into Issue Categories for Convention Delegates 1972 MIP code number Issue category (= recodes where indicated) 10 20 33 40 42 50 60 150 152 231 360 361 364 366 370 370 371 383 390 400 405 411 415 432 435 jobs education medicare = health care health care mental health = health care housing = poverty poverty conservation = environment environment minimum wage = poverty public disorder = crime negro riots = crime violence = crime crime domestic security control extremists = crime control extremists = crime youth problems: collapse into crime other racial/public order problems = crime inflation wage/price controls = inflation taxes redistribution of wealth=poverty deficit interest rates=inflation all coded as military: disarmament, armed forces, draft, civilian control of military, 710-744; 771-790 weapons, space race, desertion, general national defense Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 14 1980 MIP code number 1 2 4 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 22 25 29 30 31 Issue category (= recodes where indicated) inflation unemployment energy environment crime drug abuse = crime poverty veterans’ benefits = military trade taxes social security education extremism = domestic security military political terrorism = domestic security poor intelligence = military deficit housing = poverty insurance = health care Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 15 1984 MIP code Issue category (= recodes where indicated) number 1 2 4 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 22 25 29 30 31 37 inflation unemployment energy environment crime drug abuse = crime poverty veterans’ benefits = military trade taxes social security education extremism = domestic security military political terrorism = domestic security military deficit housing = poverty insurance = health care welfare dependence = poverty Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 16 Chapter 6 H. Responsiveness of Members of Congress to Constituency Opinion (Robustness Check for Table 6.2. Uses alternate measure of roll-call voting derived from the first factor yielded by factor analyzing roll-call votes in each policy domain.) Multilevel mixed-effects linear model estimated via restricted maximum likelihood. DV: MCi’s Estimated Position on Issuej tests of issue-ownership hypothesis districti opinion on issuej districti opinion x MC’s party owns issuej districti opinion x Democratic MC districti opinion x MC’s party owns issuej x Democratic MC additional coefficients estimated in model MCi’s party owns issuej MCi’s party owns issue x Democratic MC districti opinion x neither party owns issuej districti opinion x neither party owns issuej x Democratic MC Democratic MC neither party owns issuej neither party owns issuej x Democratic MC intercept Standard deviations of: District intercepts Issue intercepts Issue opinion slopes N .09 (.25) -1.67*** (.31) .30 (.31) .77+ (.43) .76*** (.16) -.54* (.21) 1.38*** (.35) -1.14* (.45) -.67*** (.16) -.72*** (.18) .40+ (.23) .67** (.06) .09 .13 .08 3,195 MC positions and district opinion scaled zero (liberal) to one (conservative) by issue. For additional details of model estimation, see text. Estimates significantly different from zero at +p<.10; *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001 (two-tailed tests). Responsiveness calculations: Democrats: issues owned: -.06 (.07) Republicans: issues owned: -.11 (.06) issues not owned: .26 (.06) issues not owned: .28 (.08) Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 17 I. Responsiveness of Members of Congress to Constituency Opinion (Robustness Check for Table 6.2. Uses interval-level measure of issue ownership.) Multilevel mixed-effects linear model estimated via restricted maximum likelihood. DV: MCi’s Estimated Position on Issuej tests of issue-ownership hypothesis districti opinion on issuej districti opinion x extent to which MC’s party owns issuej districti opinion x Democratic MC districti opinion x extent to which MC’s party owns issuej x Democratic MC additional coefficients estimated in model extent to which MC’s party owns issuej extent to which MC’s party owns issuej x Democratic MC districti opinion x neither party owns issuej districti opinion x neither party owns issuej x Democratic MC Democratic MC neither party owns issuej neither party owns issuej x Democratic MC intercept Standard deviations of: District intercepts Issue intercepts Issue opinion slopes N .08+ (.04) -.01+ (.00) .02 (.03) .00 (.01) .01** (.00) -.01** (.00) .29*** (.08) -.04 (.06) -.53*** (.02) -.16** (.05) .08* (.03) .73*** (.03) .11 .06 .10 5,808 MC positions and district opinion scaled zero (liberal) to one (conservative) by issue. For additional details of model estimation, see text. Estimates significantly different from zero at +p<.10; *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001 (two-tailed tests). Responsiveness calculations: On issue opposing party owns by 10 percentage points: .15 (.04) On issue a party owns by 10 percentage points: .02 (.04) Difference: .14 (.03) p < .001 (two-tailed test) Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 18 J. Responsiveness of Federal Outlays to National Spending Preferences (Robustness Check for Table 6.3. Uses interval-level measure of issue ownership.) Multilevel mixed-effects linear model estimated via restricted maximum likelihood. DV: change in % of all federal outlays spent on issue j in year t (standardized) tests of issue-ownership hypothesis public’s spending preferences in yeart-1 on issuej president’s partyt-1 owns issuej public’s spending preferencesj x extent to which president’s partyt-1 owns issuej Congresst-1 is controlled by party owning issuej public’s spending preferencesj x extent to which issuej owned by party controlling Congresst-1 additional coefficients estimated in model neither party owns issuej public’s spending preferencesj x neither party owns issuej intercept .019+ (.011) .011* (.005) -.000 (.001) .013* (.006) -.001+ (.001) -.192* (.095) -.005 (.021) .028 (.101) Standard deviations of: Year intercepts Issue opinion slopes .442 .021 N 397 Estimates significantly different from zero at +p<.10; *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001 (two-tailed tests). Responsiveness calculations (change in spending in standard deviations accompanying a 10-point increase in support for spending): Presidency, Congress controlled by party owning issue (by 10 percentage points): .33 (.15) Presidency, Congress controlled by party not owning issue (other party owns by 10 percentage points): .04 (.15) Difference: .29 (.21), p < .16 (two-tailed test) Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 19 K. Responsiveness of Federal Outlays to National Spending Preferences (Robustness checks for Table 6.3) DV: change in % of all federal outlays spent on issue j in year t (standardized) I. mixed effects model II. mixed effects model III. panel-corrected IV. panel-corrected (same as in text) with lagged DV standard errors model standard errors model w/AR(1) process public’s spending preferences in yeart-1 on issuej president’s partyt-1 owns issuej public’s spending preferencesj x president’s partyt-1 owns issuej Congresst-1 is controlled by party owning issuej public’s spending preferencesj x Congresst-1 is controlled by party owning issuej neither party owns issuej public’s spending preferencesj x neither party owns issuej .031* (.016) .164 (.125) -.003 (.018) .311* (.137) -.039* (.018) .011 (.126) -.016 (.024) lagged value of DV intercept -.171 (.129) Standard deviations of: Year intercepts Issue opinion slopes estimated autocorrelation parameter (rho) N .026+ (.015) .137 (.124) .001 (.018) .315* (.135) -.033+ (.018) .050 (.126) -.004 (.021) .106* (.049) -.149 (.132) .446 .027 397 .033 (.023) .226 (.283) .003 (.020) .425 (.293) -.046* (.019) .074 (.216) -.026 (.023) .034+ (.018) .225 (.156) .006 (.020) .421* (.174) -.047* (.020) .070 (.153) -.025 (.025) -.236 (.239) -.235 (.164) 397 .055 397 .443 .013 386 See notes on next page for discussion. For additional details, see text. Estimates significantly different from zero at +p<.10; *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001 (two-tailed tests). Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 20 Notes to Appendix Table K: This table shows that the findings in Table 6.3—that owning parties are less responsive to public opinion on the nation’s spending priorities than non-owning parties—are robust to other specifications and estimation strategies. Model I is the mixed-effects model shown in Table 6.3. Model II is the same mixed-effects model incorporating a lagged value of the dependent variable (change in spending) as predictor. Model III takes a different approach that more explicitly accounts for the time-series nature of the data. It is a panel-corrected standard errors (PCSE) model that accounts for the fact that errors may be heteroskedastic across issues. Model IV is another PCSE model that also accounts for the fact that there may be first-order autocorrelation AR(1) that is common to all the issues. It estimates the autocorrelation parameter, rho. Across all of the models, the findings are substantively similar. Ceteris paribus, the party controlling the presidency and Congress direct more federal dollars to their owned issues. When control of both branches of government is considered together, federal outlays are affected less by public opinion on issues the parties own than on issues they do not. Egan – Partisan Priorities – Online Supplementary Appendix – page 21
