U.S. senator's ideal points for higher education: Documenting partisanship, 1965-2004

Journal of Higher Education

Volumn 81, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 619-644

  Doyle, William R ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957848359     PISSN: 00221546     EISSN: 15384640     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/jhe.2010.0006     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Adams, G. D. (1997). Abortion: Evidence of issue evolution. American Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 718-737.
2. American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations. (2005). AFL-CIO 2004 House scorecard: 108th Congress, second session. Washingtion, DC: AFL-CIO.
3. Americans for Democratic Action. (2005, April). ADA's 2004 Congressional voting record. Washington, DC: Americans for Democratic Action.
4. Bafumi, J. A., Gelman, A., Park, D. K., & Kaplan, N. (2005). Practical issues in implementing and understanding Bayesian ideal point estimation. Political Analysis, 13, 171-187.
5. Bailey, M., & Rivers, D. (1997). Ideal point estimation: A survey. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
6. Bertelli, A. M., & Grose, C. R. (2006). The spatial model and the Senate trial of president Clinton. American Politics Research, 34(4), 535-559.
7. Clinto, J. D., & Mierowitz, A. (2001). Agenda constrained legislator ideal points and the spatial voting model. Political Analysis, 9, 242-259.
8. Clinton, J., Jackman, S., & Rivers, D. (2004). The statistical analysis of roll call data. American Political Science Review, 98, 355-370.
9. College Board. (2007). Trends in student aid 2007 (Tech. Rep.). Washington, DC: College Board.
10. Cook, C. E. (1998). Lobbying for higher education: How colleges and universities influence federal policy. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
11. Cox, G., & Poole, K. T. (2002). On measuring partisanship in roll-call voting: The U.S. House of Representatives, 1877-1999. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 477-489.
12. Field, K. (2006, June 2). A Texas millionaire plots the future of higher education. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(39), A16-A18.
13. Fiorina, M. P. (1989). Congress: Keystone of the Washington establishment (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
14. Fiorina, M. P., Abrams, S. J., & Pope, J. C. (2005). Culture war? The myth of a polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman.
15. Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2001). Bayesian data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Chapman and Hall.
16. Gelman, A., & King, G. (1994). Enhancing democracy through legislative redistricting. American Political Science Review, 3(88), 541-559.
17. Gill, J. (2002). Bayesian methods: A social and behavioral sciences approach. New York: Chapman.
18. Gladiuex, L. E., & King, J. E. (1999). The federal government and higher education. In P. G. Altbach, R. O. Berdahl, & P. J. Gumport (Eds.), American higher education in the twenty-first century: Social, political and economic changes (p. 151-182). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
19. Graham, H. D. (1998). The storm over Grove City College: Civil rights regulation, higher education, and the Reagan administration. History of Education Quarterly, 38(4), 407-429.
20. Hansen, W. L. (1983). Impact of student financial aid on access. Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, 35(2), 84-96.
21. Heckman, J. J., & Snyder, J. M. (1997). Linear probability models of the demand for attributes with an empirical application to estimating the preferences of legislators. RAND Journal of Economics, 28, S142-S189.
22. Jackman, S. (2000). Estimation and inference are missing data problems: Unifying social science statistics via Bayesian simulation. Political Analysis, 8(4), 307-332.
23. Jackman, S. (2004). Multidimensional analysis of roll call data via Bayesian simulation: Identification, estimation, inference, and model checking. Political Analysis, 9, 227-241.
24. Jenkins, J. A. (1999). Examining the bonding effects of party: A comparative analysis of roll-call voting in the U.S. and Confederate houses. American Journal of Political Science, 43, 144-1165.
25. Kane, T. J. (1997). Beyond tax relief: Long-term challenges in financing higher education. National Tax Journal, 50(2), 335-349.
26. Kennedy, E. (2003, October). College quality, affordability, and diversity improvement act of 2003. Introduced into U.S. Senate October 28, 2003. (S.1973)
27. Kerr, C. (1991). The great transformation in higher education, 1960-1980. Albany: State University of New York Press.
28. Kerr, C. (2001). The uses of the university (5th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Krehbiel, K., & Rivers, D. (1988). The analysis of committee power: An application to Senate voting on the minimum wage. American Journal of Political Science, 32(4), 1151-1174.
30. Londregan, J. (2000). Estimating legislators' preferred points. Political Analysis, 8, 35-56.
31. Long, B. T. (2004). The impact of federal tax credits for higher education expenses. In C. Hoxby (Ed.), College choices: The economics of which college, when college, and how to pay for it. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32. MacRae, D. (1958). Dimensions of Congressional voting. Berkeley: University of California Press.
33. Mayhew, D. R. (2004). Congress: The electoral connection (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
34. McCarty, N., Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (2001). The hunt for party discipline in Congress. American Political Science Review, 95, 673-687.
35. McKeon, H. P. (2003, October). Higher education affordability act of 2003. Introduced into U.S. House of Representatives October 16, 2003. (HR 3311)
36. Metropolis, N., & Ulam, S. (1949). The Monte Carlo method. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 44, 335-341.
37. Morris, D. (1997). Behind the Oval Office: Winning the presidency in the nineties. New York: Random House.
38. Moynihan, D. P. (1975). The politics of higher education. Daedalus, 104(1), 128-147.
39. National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund. (2006). 2006 candidate grades and endorsements. Electronic Resource: http://www.nrapvf.org/Elections/ Default.aspx
40. Neath, A. A., & Samaniego, F. J. (1997). On the efficacy of Bayesian inference for nonidentifiable models. The American Statistician, 51, 225-232.
41. Olivas, M. A. (1985). Financial aid packaging policies. The Journal of Higher Education, 56, 462-475.
42. Parsons, M. D. (1997). Power and politics: Federal higher education policymaking in the 1990s. Albany: State University of New York Press.
43. Patz, R. J., & Junker, B. (1999). A straightforward approach to Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods for item response models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 146-178.
44. Poole, K. (2005). Revised roll call matrices for congresses 1-101 (Tech. Rep.). Voteview Data Archive, University of California, San Diego. Available from http://voteview.com/dwnl.htm
45. Poole, K., & McCarty, N. (2005). Roll call matrices for congresses 102-108 (Tech. Rep.). Voteview Data Archive, University of California, San Diego. Available from http://voteview.com/dwnl.htm
46. Poole, K. T. (1981). Dimensions of interest group evaluation of the U.S. Senate, 1969-1978. American Journal of Political Science, 25, 49-67.
47. Poole, K. T. (1988). Recent developments in analytical models of voting in the U.S. Congress. American Political Science Review, 13(1), 117-133.
48. Poole, K. T. (2000). A non-parametric unfolding of binary choice data. Political Analysis, 8, 211-237.
49. Poole, K. T., & Daniels, R. S. (1985). Ideology, party and voting in the U.S. Congress. American Political Science Review, 79(2), 373-399.
50. Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (1985). A spatial model for legislative roll call analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 29(2), 357-384.
51. Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (1991). Patterns of Congressional voting. American Journal of Political Science, 35(1), 228-278.
52. Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (1997). Congress: A political-economic history of roll call voting. New York: Oxford Universtiy Press.
53. Rice, S. (1924). The political vote as a frequency distribution of opinion. Journal of American Statistical Association, 19, 70-75.
54. Rivers, D. (2004). Identification of multidimensional item-response models. Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University.
55. Rosenzweig, R. (1998). The political university: Policy, politics and presidential leadership in the American university. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
56. Shipan, C. R., & Lowry, W. R. (2001). Environmental policy and party divergence in Congress. Political Research Quarterly, 54(2), 245-263.
57. Slaughter, S. (1998). Federal policy and supply-side institutional resource allocation at public research universities. Review of Higher Education, 21, 209-244.
58. Spellings, M. A. (2007, February). Secretary Spellings discusses the state of higher education in the U.S. at North Carolina State University. Available from http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/2007/02/02012007.html
59. Spiegelhalter, D. J., Thomas, A., Best, N. G., & Gilks, W. R. (1997). Bugs 0.6: Bayesian inference using Gibbs sampling. Cambridge: MRC Biostatistics Unit.
60. Thelin, J. (2004). A history of American higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
61. U.S. Department of Education. (2006a). Digest of education statistics, 2005 (Tech. Rep.). National Center for Education Statistics.
62. U.S. Department of Education. (2006b). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education (Tech. Rep.). Washington, DC: United States Department of Education.