Penalizing the Party

Health Care Reform Issue Voting in the 2010 Election

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6180221
AutoresDavid M Konisky (0000-0002-1146-3938, Georgetown University), Lilliard E Richardson (0000-0003-2716-3101, University of Missouri)
Año2012
Volumen40
Número5
Páginas903-926
Fecha de publicación2012-09-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaAmerican Politics Research (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1532-673X • E-ISSN: 1552-3373
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1532673x11434141
OpenAlexW3126052637
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas6
Referencias citadas45

Many political pundits characterized the 2010 election as a referendum on President Obama’s health care reform law. The political science literature on issue voting, however, does not consistently demonstrate that these types of policy evaluations are central to citizens’ vote choices. Moreover, existing theories suggest different predictions about how the health care reform issue would affect elections across different levels of government. Studying data from the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), the analysis indicates that those opposed to health care reform were less likely to vote for Democratic candidates in the U.S. House, the U.S. Senate, state gubernatorial, and state attorneys general contests, controlling for partisan affiliation, political ideology, perceptions of the economy, and evaluations of other salient policy issues. These findings suggest that, across the board, Democrats were penalized for their support of health care reform, and more generally provide evidence of the role of noneconomic issue voting in U.S. elections

Democracy · Health care · Health care reform · Ideology · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Referendum · Sociology · Voting · Voting behavior · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Policy Transfer and Learning · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies · Public Administration · Health Policy