Giving order to districts: Estimating voter distributions with national election returns

Political Analysis

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 215-235

  Kernell, Georgia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 67651108638     PISSN: 10471987     EISSN: 14764989     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/pan/mpp002     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Achen, Christopher H. 1978. Measuring representation. American Journal of Political Science 22:475-510.
2. Adcock, Robert, and David Collier. 2001. Measurement validity: A shared standard for qualitative and quantitative research. American Political Science Review 95:529-46.
3. Ansolabehere, Stephen, James M. Snyder Jr., and Charles Stewart III. 2000. Old voters, new voters, and the personal vote: Using redistricting to measure the incumbency advantage. American Journal of Political Science 44:17-34.
4. Ansolabehere, Stephen, James M. Snyder Jr., and Charles Stewart III. 2001. Candidate positioning in U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science 45:136-59.
5. Ardoin, Phillip J., and James C. Garand. 2003. Measuring constituency ideology in U.S. House districts: A topdown simulation approach. The Journal of Politics 65:1165-89.
6. Bailey, Michael, and David W. Brady. 1998. Heterogeneity and representation: The senate and free trade. American Journal of Political Science 42:524-44.
7. Berry, William D., Evan J. Ringquist, Richard C. Fording, and Russell L. Hanson. 1998. Measuring citizen and government ideology in the American states: 1960-93. American Journal of Political Science 42:327-48.
8. Bishin, Benjamin G. 2007. Heterogeneity and representation reconsidered: Overcoming a paradox of responsiveness Unpublished manuscript, presented at the 2007 meeting of the American Political Science Association.
9. Canes-Wrone, Brandice, David W. Brady, and John F. Cogan. 2002. Out of step, out of office: Electoral accountability and House members' voting. American Political Science Review 96:127-40.
10. Carson, Jamie L., and Erik J. Engstrom. 2005. Assessing the electoral connection: Evidence from the early United States. American Journal of Political Science 49:746-57.
11. Carson, Jamie L., Erik J. Engstrom, and Jason M. Roberts. 2006. Redistricting, candidate entry, and U.S. House elections. American Political Science Review 50:283-93.
12. CCES. 2007. Cooperative Congressional Election Study. http://web.mit.edu/polisci/portl/cces/index.html (accessed April 21, 2009).
13. Degan, Arianna, and Antonio M. Merlo. 2006. A structural model of turnout and voting in multiple elections, second version. PIER Working Paper No. 06-021. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=925647.
14. Downs, Anthony. 1957. An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper.
15. Engstrom, Erik J., and Samuel Kernell. 2005. Manufactured responsiveness: The impact of state electoral laws on unified party control of the presidency and House of Representatives, 1840-1940. American Journal of Political Science 49:531-49.
16. Erikson, Robert S., and Gerald C. Wright Jr. 1980. Policy representation of constituency interests. Political Behavior 2:91-106.
17. Erikson, Robert S., and Gerald C. Wright Jr. 1997. Voters, candidates and issues in congressional elections. Congress reconsidered. 6th edn, eds. Dodd Lawrence C. and I. Bruce. Oppenheimer, Chapter 4. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
18. Erikson, Robert S., Gerald C. Wright Jr., and John P. McIver. 1993. Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and the American states. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19. Fenno, Richard. 1978. Home style: House members in their districts Boston, MA: Little Brown.
20. Fiorina, Morris. 1974. Representatives, roll calls and constituencies Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
21. Gelman, Andrew, John B. Carlin, Hal S. Stern, and Donald B. Rubin. 2004. Bayesian data analysis. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall.
22. Griffin, John D., and Brian Newman. 2005. Are voters better represented? The Journal of Politics 67:1206-27.
23. Jacobson, Gary C. 2000. Party polarization in national politics: The electoral connection. In Polarized politics: Congress and the President in a partisan era, eds. Jon R. Bond and Richard Fleisher. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
24. Layman, Geoffrey C., and Thomas M. Carsey. 2002. Party polarization and 'conflict extension' in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science 46:786-802.
25. Levendusky, Matthew S., Jeremy C. Pope, and Simon Jackman. 2008. Measuring district level preferences with implications for the study of U.S. elections. Journal of Politics 70:736-753.
26. Masket, Seth E. 2007. It takes an outsider: Extralegislative organization and partisanship in the California Assembly, 1849-2006. American Journal of Political Science 51:482-97.
27. Page, Benjamin I., and Robert Y. Shapiro. 1992. The rational public: Fifty years of trends in Americans' policy preferences. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
28. Poole, Keith T., and Howard Rosenthal. 1984. U.S. Presidential Elections 1968-80: A spatial analysis. American Journal of Political Science 28:282-312.
29. Schwarz, John E., and Barton Fenmore. 1977. Presidential election results and congressional roll call behavior: The cases of 1964, 1968, and 1972. Legislative Studies Quarterly 2:409-22.
30. Segal, Jeffrey A., Charles M. Cameron, and Albert D. Cover. 1992. A spatial model of roll call voting: Senators, constituents, presidents, and interest groups in Supreme Court confirmations. American Journal of Political Science 36:96-121.
31. Snyder, James M. Jr. 2005. Estimating the distribution of voter preferences using partially aggregated voting data. The Political Methodologist 13:2-5.
32. Wright, Gerald C. Jr., Robert S. Erikson, and John P. McIver. 1985. Measuring state partisanship and ideology with survey data. The Journal of Politics 47:469-89.