Explaining divided U.S. senate delegations, 1788-1996: A realignment approach

American Political Science Review

Volumn 92, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 391-399

  Brunell, Thomas L ^a   Grofman, Bernard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032091241     PISSN: 00030554     EISSN: 15375943     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/2585671     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Aistrup, Joseph A. 1996. The Southern Strategy Revisited. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
2. Alesina, Alberto, Morris Fiorina, and Howard Rosenthal. 1991. "Why Are There So Many Divided Senate Delegations?" Working paper, National Bureau of Economic Research.
3. Alesina, Alberto, and Howard Rosenthal. 1995. Partisan Politics, Divided Government, and the Economy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
4. Alt, James E. 1994. The Impact of the Voting Rights Act on Black and White Voter Registration in the South. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5. Brady, David W., and Naomi B. Lynn. 1973. "Switched Seat Congressional Districts: Their Effects on Party Voting and Public Policy." American Journal of Political Science 17(August):528-43.
6. Brown, Courtney. 1991. Ballots of Tumult. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
7. Brunell, Thomas L. 1997. "Short-Term versus Long-Term Forces in U.S. Senate Elections." Ph.D. Diss. University of California, Irvine.
8. Bullock, Charles S., III. 1988. "Regional Realignment from an Officeholding Perspective." Journal of Politics 50(August):553-74.
9. Bullock, Charles S., III, and David E. Brady. 1983. "Party, Constituency, and Roll Call Voting in the U.S. Senate." Legislative Studies Quarterly 8(February):29-43.
10. Burnham, Walter Dean. 1970. Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.
11. Burnham, Walter Dean. 1991. "Critical Realignment: Dead or Alive?" In The End of Realignment, ed. Byron E. Shafer. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
12. Clubb, Jerome M., William H. Flanigan, and Nancy H. Zingale. 1980. Partisan Realignment: Voters, Parties, and Government in American History. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
13. Congressional Quarterly. 1994. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U.S. Elections, 3d ed. Washington. DC: CQ Press.
14. Cox, Gary W., and Jonathan N. Katz. 1996. "Why Did the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections Grow?" American Journal of Political Science 40(May):478-98.
15. Fiorina, Morris P. 1992. Divided Government. New York: Macmillan.
16. Gelman, Andrew, and Gary King. 1990. "Estimating Incumbency Advantage without Bias." American Journal of Political Science 34(November): 1142-64.
17. Grofman, Bernard, and Thomas L. Brunell. 1997. "Explaining the Ideological Difference between Two U.S. Senators Elected from the Same State: An Institutional Effects Model." Presented at the 1997 Public Choice Conference, San Francisco.
18. Haynes, George H. 1960. The Senate of the United States: Its History and Practice. 2 vols. New York: Russell & Russell.
19. Jacobson, Gary C., and Samuel Kernell. 1983. Strategy and Choice in Congressional Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
20. Jung, Gi-Ryong, Lawrence W. Kenny, and John R. Lott, Jr. 1994. "An Explanation for Why Senators from the Same State Vote Differently So Frequently." Journal of Public Economics 54(May): 65-96.
21. Key, V. O. 1955. "A Theory of Critical Elections." Journal of Politics 17(February):3-18.
22. King, Gary, and Andrew Gelman. 1991. "Systemic Consequences of Incumbency Advantage in United States House Elections." American Journal of Political Science 35(February):110-38.
23. Ladd, Everett Carl. 1991. "Like Waiting for Godot, The Uselessness of 'Realignment' for Understanding Change in Contemporary American Politics." In The End of Realignment, ed. Byron Shafer. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
24. Mayhew, David. 1974. "The Case of the Declining Marginals." Polity 6(3):295-317.
25. Nardulli, Peter F. 1995. "The Concept of a Critical Realignment, Electoral Behavior, and Political Change." American Political Science Review 89(March):10-23.
26. Segura, Gary M., and Stephen P. Nicholson. 1995. "Sequential Choices and Partisan Transitions in U.S. Senate Delegations: 1972-1988." Journal of Politics 57(February):86-100.
27. Sundquist, James L. 1983. Dynamics of the Party System. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
28. Wattenberg, Martin P. 1991. The Rise of Candidate-Centered Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Wattenberg, Martin P. 1994. The Decline of American Political Parties 1952-1992. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.