POSC Final Exam

Socialization agent: parents

people with "helicopter parents" are more likely to believe that the government should guarantee good quality of life

closely and deeply divided

polarized - most people are on the extreme sides (high on democratic and republican sides)

leading questions

questions that predispose a respondent to answer in a certain way

SCHIP

provides health insurance to low-income children who do not qualify for Medicaid

random vs systematic

whether results are due to chance (randomness) or if they are real (systematic) -ex. poorly wording in questions can lead to systematic measuring error

problems in interpreting polls: half full/half empty

whether something is good/bad can depend on perspective -ex. is 80% support of a Mormon president good or is 20% not supporting a Mormon president bad?

Accuracy of 2012 forecasts

Average prediction: Obama would receive 50.17% of the 2-party vote Reality: Obama received ~51.8% of the 2-party vote -predictions were made ~109 days before the election

Partisanship leads to incorrect beliefs

-1998: majority of Democrats responded inflation had "gotten worse" under Reagan, but in reality, inflation had fallen by 70% in eight years -1996: majority of Republicans thought the budget deficit had increased under Clinton, but in reality, it shrunk by over 90% -providing correct information does not always change the opinions of people (often those with strong partisan opinions)

Reasons to believe Groseclose

-A second method of measuring media bias has been developed by Gentzkow and Shapiro -They examine the frequency with which partisan phrases recur in Congressional speeches and news reports --ex. "death tax" vs "estate tax" -- Republicans refer to it as "death tax" to emphasize its connection to recently dead people --Democrats use "estate tax" to remind people that it is more relevant to wealthy people --if one phrase is used more than the other, they seem to affiliate with one side

History of interest group formation

-Americans have a reputation for forming interest groups -According to one study, the number of lobbying organizations more than tripled between the 1960s and 1990s -A variety of causes have contributed to the post 1960s explosion in the number of interest groups: -Expansion of federal government in social and economic policy: once the government does more, people are more affected -Government encouragement: politicians found it useful to have allies in the private sector convincing other politicians -Social movements: there was a number of major social movements in this time period, and from these movements, some organizations formed -Technological change: communication and travel make it easier for groups to form

The facts on polarization

-Congress has polarized although the total level is comparable to the amount of polarization around the turn of the 20th century -Most people identify as moderates and have moderate opinions on issues -the minority of the most politically engaged citizens have polarized somewhat -the electorate has better sorted itself into the two parties -Republicans and Democrats like each other less than in the past, though people's dislike is driven more by party elites than regular people and dislike has increased far more among that engaged minority -the media's fixation on unrepresentative partisan voices in itself worsened division and led people to believe members of the two parties are more different than they actually are

Effects of loss of small newspapers

-Research suggests the closure of even a single, small newspaper can have a dramatic impact on local politics -ex. The Cincinnati Post, which published over 80% of the combined local coverage of news in the northern Kentucky suburbs, published its final edition on December 31, 2007 -In areas where the Post provided a higher share of coverage, after its closure voter turnout fell, incumbents became more likely to win re-election, and fewer candidates ran for office --news vacuum --less political participation

Reasons to doubt Groseclose

-The differences in think tank citation patterns may be explained by differences in how conservative and liberal think tanks publicize their work --conservative think tanks are not as concerned with media attention but want to distribute research to legislative aids, etc. to influence policy --liberal think tanks want to get their research to the public, which may be the reason they are cited more -The time period when his data was collected might be problematic --conducted during the George W Bush administration (beginnings of War on Terror, military operations, president in the news more often than ususal) --if Bush is quoted more, think tanks can be used to even out views -Is assuming all news should be centrist the best way to think about media bias? --ex. views on climate change

Why does the media have such a different perception of polarization than political scientists?

-Who they are talking to -elites can lose sight of the rest of the country inside their own bubble -role of social media (ex. Democrats on twitter are much more liberal than most)

why does college make students more liberal

-academic mind set?: open to new experiences, critically examine past and traditions -faculty influence?: most professors are not conservative --conservative professors often hide views for fear of consequences 1. bias in hiring: professors on campus would often not be supportive of a new conservative professor 2. self-selection: potential conservative professors recognize is would not be a comfortable atmosphere

Third parties

-always present on the ballot --some only exist locally (ie Working families) -almost never matter to the outcome --over 20 and 21st centuries, only four have won any electoral votes

2016: when pollsters got it wrong?

-average signed error in 2016 was not outstanding compared to 1936-2020 averages -polling has become more accurate over time -there is no consistent bias in terms of direction of the miss -polling in individual states is not conducted by major national organizations but by pollsters who do not have the same resources --state polls can be inaccurate -educational polarization: linear relationship between education and partisanship --education is becoming a stronger predictor of how people vote --polls underrepresent people with lower education and overrepresent people with higher education -> polls showed more support for Clinton than there actually was -most national pollsters weighted for education but most state polls did not in 2016

differential partisan cooperation

-best thinking as to explain the 2016 election results -strongest Republicans were less likely to participate in polls now than they were before

Socialization agent: college

-college pushes students in a liberal direction

Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare)

-combination of mandates and subsidies to improve access to care -need younger and healthier population to pay taxes so older and unhealthier population can benefit, so people were required to have health insurance --if not, there was a financial penalty --if someone can't afford it, the government helps pay through subsidies -changed regulatory environment for insurers (the reason it became more popular) --children can stay on parents' insurance until age 26 --insurers can't deny based on pre-existing conditions --no cap on lifetime benefits --insurers are required to cover more procedures and drugs -the individual mandate was repealed in the GOP tax reform bill in 2017

competition leads to more negative news overall

-computer used to predict the probability an article would be seen as negative in tone --COVID case count and negativity --negativity in national news does not reflect case counts -In this study, among US major media outlets, 15,000 stories mentioned increases in caseloads, while only 2,500 mentioned decreases (a 6:1 ratio) -US major news outlets ran just 1,371 stories about institutions or companies working on a vaccine, vs. 8,756 stories involving Trump and mask wearing -The major explanation for this negative coverage is that consumers read and shared the most negative stories more often -This overwhelming negativity most certainly had consequences for the public at large

2016- the year when models were wrong?

-contrary to public discussions, political scientists predicted a close election: no matter the winner, the expected share of 2-party vote was between 52.5% and 47.5% -economy was okay, Obama approval was lukewarm, two previous democratic terms -average prediction: Clinton would receive 50.61% of the 2-party score

Tim Groseclose - Left Turn

-develops a measure of media bias: "slant quotients" -theory: reporters will not directly frame writing in a liberal way, but instead find a way to incorporate someone else stating that perspective (such as through quotes) -SQs are calculated by using a combination of Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) scores and media think tank citations -how frequently a Congress member cites a certain think tank -keep track on how Congress members' votes core on liberal/conservative scale -how often news outlets cite a think tank and the ideology of that think tank -many news media outlets have a liberal bias -compares politician and media outlet PQs

Voter fraud

-fraud has happened in the past and can still occur today -difficult to study (if it's successful, it goes undetected) -evidence is clear that any fraud that exists is isolated and statistically negligible -perception of fraud is highly dependent on whether the candidate they favored won

Presidential Debates

-have rarely, if ever, mattered -polling analysis shows the best prediction of where a race stands after a debate is where it stood before it -debates attract viewers who are at least likely to be influenced by them -in fact, partisanship will determine who people think won the debate, making it unlikely a debate will change many minds

Political parties in the 1970s vs today

-in the 1970s political observers saw a decline of American political parties --more split ticket voting, people voting for other party, feeling thermometers showed lukewarm feelings to both parties, parties seemed very similar, partisanship was not as important -in recent years, we've entered an era of increasingly strong partisanship

life cycle effect

-individual based -people acquire more information over their lifetimes and become more conservative with age -most do not change (remain aligned with their ideologies) -many become more conservative, few become more liberal

Can voters make intelligent decisions anyway?

-looking at factual knowledge of politics is a misleading way of assessing citizen competency -voters rely on low-information rationality, where individuals economically incorporate information from daily life and past experiences in the form of short cuts --ex. party id, experience with economy, seeing advertisements -we all use shortcuts regardless of education --there are many elections and candidates

1940's research about party changing

-most people express a vote choice in spring before the start of a formal campaign and this vote choice coincided with their predispositions and hey stuck to it in the fall --this is significant because this was a period of "brokered conventions" where you did not know who the nominees were until the convention --even if a person didn't know who the nominees were, they knew who they would vote for -only ~8% were "party changers" -these studies argued that campaigns mainly serve to inform people and keep their supporters in line (help people gravitate towards the sides they were predisposed to support) -many political scientists think their conclusions about campaigns are still fairly accurate

How individuals answer survey questions: Receive-Accept-Sample Model

-opinion statements are the outcome of a process in which people receive new information, decide whether to accept it, then sample at the moment of answering questions 1. people receive information (people interested in politics receive new information more information and intentionally) 2. people choose whether to accept the information (politically sophisticated people reject information disagreeing with views, but most accept uncritically) 3. people sample what is at the top of their head at the moment (aka what they just heard) (people usually only think about how they feel when asked about a question) leading to unstable opinions

Bryan Caplan - The Case Against Education (pt. 2 - solutions)

-suggests that paradoxically, free college proposals would worsen social inequality by causing credit inflation and making the signal from a degree weaker --if everyone has a college degree, it does not signal any more who is intelligent, conscientious, or conformist --wealthy people would go further to prove this -Caplan's preferred option: cut government subsidies to education --lower societal levels of education will not lead to deskilling, but to credit deflation --if no one (or few people) has a college degree, it would not be a very useful signal for employees --people would not need to go to college for jobs not requiring it

people follow their party's leaders

-take cues from elites in party -take on opinions of leader if they do not know much or do not have strong opinions on a topic -survey based experiment: debate on expanding SCHIP presented through newspaper articles --treatment: partisan cues, control: no partisan cues --result: people who approved of Bush's presidency were more opposed to SCHIP in both but much stronger correlation in treatment

The reciprocal policy-participation relationship in practice

-the U.S. government spends $2.40 on the elderly for every $1 spent on children -the U.S. spends 8 times as much for Medicare as it does for education -a retiring couple with average wages can expect to pay about $510,000 in taxes over the course of their lifetime -they will receive about $821,000 in entitlement benefits -according to the Federal Reserve, the median net worth for people under 35 is $13,900

Accuracy of 2008 forecasts

-the mean prediction was that McCain would receive 46.8% of the 2-party vote -he actually received 46.2% -predictions were made on average 110 days before the election

affective polarization

-the process of steady growth of the mutual dislike between Republicans and Democrats since the 1970s -emotions, speaks to the fact that Republicans and Democrats like each other less than in the past (-produced by polarization and partisan sorting)

Fundamentals in 2012: Obama was the favorite, and it was his election to lose

-the slowly growing economy was sufficient enough to provide an advantage -Obama was surprisingly popular: given the conditions, Obama was about 3% more popular than one would expect --benefitted from democratic approval --voters did not hold him responsible for the economy (they blamed Bush instead)

The gender gap

-the tendency for women to support democrats and men to support republicans -the term was introduced by feminists after the 1940 election hoping to put pressure on the Reagan administration -it is misleading to talk about "the women's vote" --gender is not as important a factor as other factors like race, marital status, age, partisanship, etc. -causes of gender gap are the different views between men and women on the use of force, civil rights, and social welfare but not "women's issues"

list experiment

-two groups: control and treatment -control group asked how many issues on a list they supported -treatment asked an additional question (gay marriage added to list) -difference between control and treatment

Forecasting the 2020 election: results

-ultimately, forecasting models proved very accurate -average predictions: Trump would receive 47.8% of the two-party vote and 237 electoral college votes -Trump actually won 47.7% of the two-party vote, and 232 Electoral College votes -reversal in Trump's fortunes was stunning -his presidency also represents a missed opportunity to grow his support

More effective ads...

-visual and narrative based ads trump words and statistics: emotion inducing ads have more effect -we're more trusting of things in print -verbal-visual redundancy: read and hear at the same time makes us more likely to recall the information -content migration: pattern where people judge information based on quality of source but often misremember where they got the information

How voters approach a ballot

-voting is like taking an SAT test (alone, quiet, multiple choices) -"roll off" is extremely widespread

Negative Ads

-we don't know if they work -most likely to influence voters with low political information -negative ads have higher recall rates -many suppress political participation: a study found that people shown negative ads participated less than the control

People mostly consume relatively unbiased news

-whether people of an ideology/party share a media outlet -tracking internet activity of people to find average media diet score --most people consume sources in the middle

Four key factors key to understanding presidential elections

1. Job approval rating of the current president -Even if not running for reelection -Measuring in summer (generally) -By late summer, polls are pretty stable 2. Performance of the economy in the first half of the year -GDP growth, unemployment rate, how it is covered in the news -first half of year matters most because this is when people make up their minds -late economic growth is not as noticeable by people 3. if incumbent is running and for how long his party has held the presidency -incumbents with growing economies don't lose -few incumbents have lost, but have during recessions/poor economic conditions -restlessness in electorate after 2 terms of one party running the presidency - usually a party switch occurs because people want change 4. partisan distributions of the electorate -split ticket voting is low -less significant than other factors

Three basic components of political parties

1. Party in Government: legislative bodies, elect leaders, work to pass bills, resolutions, etc) (such as House & Senate Democrats & Republicans) 2. Party in the Electorate: people who choose to identify with a party and support the candidates in elections 3. Party Organization: institutions that seek to field candidates for office, assist with campaigns (ex. DNC, NYC Democratic Party)

Evidence that implementation of voter ID laws may lead to higher turnout

A recent study used 1.6 billion voter observations taken between 2008-2018 -found that in states that implemented a strict voter ID law, the likelihood that nonwhite voters were contacted by a campaign increased by 4.6% points

Important determinants of voter turnout

Age -the older people get, the more likely they are to vote --lower cost, higher benefit, higher civic duty/psychological gratification Young voters and the "D" term -younger Americans are least likely to view voting as a civic duty -panel studies suggest that the views of younger Americans are unlikely to change as they grow older Education -People with higher degrees vote more --higher D: know/learn about voting and importance, lower C: less likely to have an hourly wage job they would have to miss to vote Involvement in a community -people with deep roots turn out at higher rates (ex. homeowners, church members, people who have lived in the same place for a long time) Contact with a campaign

Trends in political knowledge

Americans should be more knowledgeable about politics... but aren't -the invention of cable, satellite TV, and the internet has widened the knowledge gap

interest group

An organized group of people that makes policy-related appeals to government -different from political parties (persuade people already in office) -both membership (can become a member) & non-membership organizations (can't join, represent institutions) -many governments have interest groups --includes state, local, and foreign governments

Types of third parties

Contender (ie Bull Moose, Reform): build around ambitions of an individual, meant to help that person run for higher office, -little organization, do not persist for long beyond the party Promoter (ie Prohibition): no expectation for winning, field candidates to promote an issue/agenda -campaigns draw attention to issues -Prohibition is one of the oldest

Social Security Solutions

Cut benefits -have SS pay out less to recipients -would be unpopular -benefits are increasing due to inflation (increasing, not decreasing) Raise payroll taxes -cap on taxable earnings Raise cap on taxable income -would not fix issues Raise minimum retirement age Means test benefits -change the program so it is only for people who need it Privatization -problem: imposes more risk (ex. market crash affects retirement funds)

Veterans Care

Every veteran (except for those dishonorably discharged) is eligible to receive treatment through the VA -the VA operates 1,400 treatment facilities nationally and treats 81,000 patients a day on average

Duverger's Law

In any political system that uses first past the post or single member plurality, only one person will win the race, which leads to strategic voting - people don't want to waste a vote on someone who won't win -the principle that in a democracy with single-member districts and plurality voting, like the United States, only two parties' candidates will have a realistic chance of winning political office.

Matthew Hindman - The Myth of Digital Democracy

In the idealistic view, internet could be good for politics -distributes political power more evenly/broadly -anyone can share opinions/information -people have access to a variety of sources Hindman makes us question the democratizing effects of the internet -people rarely use the internet to seek out news or political information --Only 2.9% of web traffic goes to news sites --Only 0.12% of web traffic goes to political websites --there is not a single political website among the top 800 sites on the web --In comparison, about 10.5% of traffic goes to adult content method: uses Hitwise to track web traffic findings: audiences are as concentrated online as they are offline -the internet lowers the cost of distribution, but not of production, meaning that barriers to entry still exist --not everyone can afford to pay costs -the top 20 political websites receive 43% of all visits Bloggers aren't normal people -took census of top bloggers and reached out to writers for information on who they are --majority of top bloggers have advanced degrees and attended an elite college or university --bloggers hold elite jobs such as lawyers, professors, or executives (write for a living and have a flexible schedule)

Problems interest groups face (& why the problem exists)

Like voting, anything an interest group produces is a public good (eg. a tax cut), hence, groups won't spontaneously form. instead, interest groups must deal with free-rider problems (more severe for larger groups) (ex. ~157 million American women, only ~500,000 women in National Organization for Women)

Impact of early voting

Little impact, but in theory: may lead to lower turnout -election day is not as important (not as much emphasis) -reduces mobilization activities --casual voters not encouraged

Media coverage and affective polarization

Media coverage has directly contributed to affective polarization -has led people to believe Republicans and Democrats are much further apart than they really are

Major US Health Progams

Medicare Medicaid SCHIP Veterans Care Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare)

Liberal bias?

Most journalists are liberal -just because a reporter is liberal doesn't mean that their reporting is biased

Decline of American Newspapers

Newspapers have been the biggest loser in the media market transformation, due to the changing habits of younger Americans and a disruption to their delivery model -digital subscriptions have not been enough to offset changes -younger generations have not become accustomed to getting news from a newspaper -how people get news has changed -people do not want to subscribe to a newspaper when they can get free information online -the number of daily newspapers peaked around 1900 --cheap printing, high literacy --decreased over time -newspapers that stayed in business decreased staff by 1/2

Are additional requirements causing longer lines to vote?

On average 2016 voters: -waited in a 10 person line -took 81 seconds to check in to vote -cast their ballot in 3 minutes and 41 seconds

Polls in 2020: Preliminary findings

Polls performed much worse in 2020 than in 2016 -average signed error of 3.9% in Biden's favor in national polls was the highest in four decades -the problem was broader than the presidential race alone. polls across the board consistently overestimated support for Democratic candidates --for senate and gubernatorial races, combined polls were 6 points too favorable for Democratic candidates on average -explanations for inaccuracies of polls in 2016 do not apply to 2020 -no support for the "Shy Trump Voter" hypothesis

Nate Silver

Silver and other similar forecasts rely heavily on polls over fundamentals -polls change, fundamentals don't

opinion as a thermostat

Stimson's Policy Mood 1952-2020 -calculated every two years -takes 1000s of opinion questions and codes them as either liberal or conservative when policy is liberal, the public thinks it is too liberal and becomes more conservative. when policy is conservative, the public thinks it is too conservative and becomes more liberal.

how Americans get their news

TV is the single greatest source of news, but is losing ground to the internet

Influence of political spending

The influence of campaign contributions pales in comparison to other explanations for how members of Congress vote -Another study examined the impact of corporate contributions on support for the agenda of the Chamber of Commerce -an additional $60,000 in contributions from corporate PACs translates into just 2 points more support for the Chamber agenda, but changing a member's party would change their score by 30 points If anything, research suggests it is more likely that campaign contributions buy time -A recent experiment showed that 12.5% of Congressional offices were willing to schedule a meeting with the Representative or their Chief of Staff if they were told they would be meeting with campaign donors -Only 2.4% of offices set up a meeting with the Representative or their Chief of Staff if they were told they would only be meeting with constituents

Does it matter how many people vote?

The logic goes: 1. Members of minority groups, young people, and less well-off people vote at lower rates 2. These groups are more supportive of Democratic positions on the issues, and thus of Democratic candidates 3. Hence, increases in turnout will disproportionately bring into the voting pool people who are relatively more likely to support Democratic candidates, thus leading to an increased Democratic vote share -example of an aggregation fallacy

significance of third parties

The major contribution of third parties to American politics is that their policy agendas are often co-opted by one of the two major parties -Free Soil and Know-Nothings: Free soil- anti-slavery party in 1830s-40s, economic (not moral) reasons. Know-nothing- anti-Catholic with goals of restricting catholic access to office --adopted by republican party -Populist Party: 1986- populist candidate was endorsed by Democrats -Progressive Party: broad ideas- regulation of economy, food & drug safety standards, electoral reform, etc. --embraced in party by both parties

How the market impacts news

The media may have a key democratic role, but it is still a business and therefore must respond to market pressures -news outlets cater most to women aged 18-34 -women are marginal viewers: watch sometimes --to grow audience, outlets convert sometimes viewers to regular viewers -role in advertising: advertisers want to advertise to these people- they are raising kids and are more active in the economy result: news often reflects topics young women care about -20-40% of young women report following crime news, health news, and entertainment news "very closely" -But just 8.4% of young women report following political news in DC "very closely" -for a time, network news could resist these market pressures (they were an "oligopoly") -now, due to increased competition, the network news is focused more on "soft" (ex. crime, entertainment, health) over "hard" (ex. international affairs, policy) news

Forecasting the 2020 election: challenges in forecasting

There were some unique challenges for forecasters last election -variables changed by the pandemic: employment, economy -pandemic induced recession -increased partisan loyalty among voters: even with an unpopular president, people committed to their side -is focusing on the popular vote still the right approach?: Clinton won the popular vote, but not the electoral college - could the same scenario happen in 2020? -- should the electoral college be forecasted?

Why is there so little money in American politics?

Think of political contributions as consumption, not investment -a form of political participation

Medicaid

Track 2 policy -matching grant: states are required to match at a certain ratio the amount they receive in funding from the federal government -provides coverage for low-income people -federal government provides matching grants for programs run and designed by the states -Medicaid expenses account for almost 20% of state general fund -fraud and physician unwillingness to accept Medicaid patients are two problems --up to 7% of Medicaid expenditures are fraudulent (mainly providers take advantage, not patients) --as costs increase, states put pressure on reimbursement rates. reimbursement rates are lower for people with Medicaid

Party in the Electorate (perspectives on party ID)

Two basic perspectives on party ID (what it means when someone identifies with a party) 1. Party ID is a fundamental, stable part of a person's social identity (important part of who a person is) -decided early in life -same as parents' -stable for the rest of life -an "unmoved mover" - never changes, predicts political actions and opinions -treats party ID as an independent variable only 2. Party ID is a "running tally" of judgements -people do not seem themselves as Republican or Democrat but keep opinions on parties based on what is going on in the world -sees party ID as an independent and dependent variable -both views capture important truths about party ID --for some, it is social identity, stable, etc. --macropartisanship sees fluctuations

Rational Voting Model

V=P(B)-C+D V: Decision to vote P: Probability vote is decisive B: Benefit from victory of preferred candidate C: Cost of voting D: Feelings of civic duty or psychological gratification If V is positive, person votes. If V is negative, person will not vote P is nearly 0, so B is cancelled out, so decision mostly comes down to C and D Equation used to understand irregularities

Convenience of Voting and Turnout

Voting in the US is already easy enough that any change to electoral rules that make it marginally harder or easier to cast a ballot will not impact turnout

Problem with Social Security

Workers per beneficiary ratio is decreasing over time -fewer workers (due to lower fertility rates) -more beneficiaries (due to seniors living longer) The program is running an annual deficit -paying out more than it takes in -tapping into trust fund --trust fund will be depleted at some point in the 2030s

economic insecurity

Younger and middle-aged Americans face escalating challenges of economic insecurity: -if a challenge comes up, they will no longer be secure economically -Job Losses: due to fundamental changes in the economy (ex. jobs being done by robots, outsourcing to other countries, collapse of retail) --people no longer have a job or income --fewer jobs overall -Healthcare Costs --have been linked to over 60% of US bankruptcies --even with insurance, people cannot always pay out of pocket costs --prices increasing -College Tuition -tuition has outpaced inflation, so that a college degree costs three times more than it did in the 1980s --from 2003 to 2012 alone, the proportion of 25 year olds with student debt increased from 25% to 40%, and the total amount of debt doubled -Saving for Retirement --jobs used to have retirement plans, but are now more likely to be defined contribution plans (matched) - more risk, less insecurity

Voting is Irrational

all benefits democracy produces are public goods - non-rivalrous (people are not competing to consume that good) and non-excludable (whether someone contributed to the production of that good or not does not exclude them from consuming it) -elections and their benefits are non-rivalrous and non-excludable voting is costly: time to register, researching candidates and where to vote, waiting in line, missing work -rational decision is to free ride

is the public actually polarized?

analysts who point to 50:50 elections as evidence of public polarization are confusing a public that is closely divided with one that is deeply divided -the only way to tell is by looking at opinions of people -people say close election results are because of polarization -the public has better sorted itself into two categories -the most engaged and politically active segment of the population has polarized somewhat (but not as much as Congress)

Matthew Baum - Sex, Lies, & War

analyzes through survey questions the relationship between a person's soft news exposure and how closely they follow a political topic shows that people with little knowledge or interest in politics still learn from soft news as an incidental by product -hard news information piggybacks on soft news

John Geer - In Defense of Negativity

argues "negativity plays an important and underappreciated role in democracies" -codes the appeals in 60 second and shorter TV ads sponsored by the presidential campaigns and finds: --campaigns are becoming more negative --but negative appeals are likely to be based on the issues (issue-based attacks, not character based) --rising negativity is not making voters question American democracy (no relationship between % of negativity in ads and public's faith in election, only slight relationship between negativity and trust in government)

aggregation fallacy

assume what is true at an individual level is also true at a population level

Bryan Caplan - The Case Against Education (pt. 1 - problems with education)

categorizes skills/majors as high/medium/low usefulness determines percentages of degrees earned in many fields of study and finds that around 75% of degrees are in medium or low usefulness fields argues that money is mostly funding the study of useless subjects that have no connection to the skills people will actually need to perform their jobs -according to his evaluations, over 40% of high school coursework and over 40% of college majors are of "low usefulness" --there is still waste in "useful" courses and majors -even if coursework is useful, students aren't retaining much of it --another study analyzing the Collegiate Learning Assessment shows that 45% of students do not make any gains in their thinking, reasoning, or writing skills in their first two years of college --administered a task measuring skills at a sample of colleges at the beginning of freshman year and end of sophomore year -Both students and faculty are to blame for these findings --students report spending only 12 hours per week studying --1/3 of students had not taken a class requiring 40 pages of reading a week even if the curriculum is useless and students are not developing skills, pursuing more education is still a wise choice from an individual perspective due to signaling -a college degree signals three important characteristics: intelligence, conscientiousness, and conformism

solutions to free-riding

coercion -some people are forced to contribute to an interest group --ex. unions: in the past people could not work at a place without joining a union -informal coercion: teachers do not have to join teachers' union but are pressured selective benefits -benefits people only receive if they contribute to an interest group -informational benefits (access to information) -material benefits (type of good/service, ie. AARP discounts) -social benefits (networking events and conferences to get connections) -purposive benefits (satisfaction for contributing) Patrons and Political Entrepreneurs -pay costs for a group, eliminating free-riding

Trust in the media over time has...

decreasd

problems measuring opinion: measurement error

difference between observed value and true value -ex. people do not remember the exact amount of money they made off the top of their head -random vs systematic

problems measuring opinion: sampling error

difference between opinion measured in a poll's sample and the opinion of the full population -reported as "margin of error" (+/-) -reduced with larger sample sized (up until a certain point) --most pollsters take a sample of ~1500-2500 people, adding more people past this point does not change the error much -especially problematic for subsets of the population --smaller numbers of a subset of a population within a sampling size -> not as accurate within this sample alone -not paying attention to sampling error can lead to inaccurate statements and ideas -polls should be reported showing error margins

Social Security

established by the Social Security act of 1935 -originally excluded certain occupations, primarily on racial grounds, but has been expanded over time --negotiation between northern liberals and southern segregationists --ex. agriculture workers, household health --had major impacts on economic outcomes long-term -pays benefits to retirees (largest group), survivors (people who lost a parent before retirement age), and individuals with a disability (who can't work) -pay as you go program financed through payroll contributions paid equally by employer and employees --taxes from current workers used in that current year to pay benefits for current recipients --self sustaining -individuals eligible to start receiving benefits at age 62 -size of an individual's benefit varies based on how much they pay into the program during years of employment -if an individual is high income, benefits are taxable -individuals must work for at least ten years for benefits

generational effect

events that only impact people of a certain age -ex. people who lived on college campuses during the Vietnam War gave more liberal answers on questions about use of force and protests

random sample

everyone in population has an equal chance of being included in the sample -more difficult now that there are fewer landlines and people don't answer phones

Obstacles to third party success

expensive: large start-up costs -establishing offices locally and in all 50 states -staff, websites, computers -donors don't want to invest unless they believe the party will be successful --parties need money for success and need success for money Ballot access problems: rules to qualify for the ballot are difficult to meet -signatures hard to gather --time constraints, filing fees, other rules Republican and Democrat parties discriminate against them -ie in debates --typically, the rule is that a 3rd party needs at least 15% in polls to qualify for a debate Duverger's Law

Consequences of the decline of the newspaper market

fewer cities with multiple newspapers -multiple newspapers can cover topics from different perspectives -fewer newspapers existing can lead to monopolies and lower quality information death of afternoon papers -many of the best newspapers were published in the afternoon and were read on people's way home -now people have instant access to information and do not need afternoon papers rise of chain ownership -as papers have financial pressure, they are acquired by larger conglomerates -the cost and work can be distributed among papers -leads to homogenized news and standardized coverage reduction in the amount of political news -the number of staff cut in half -a typical loss of 12 reporters reduces a newspaper's expected volume of political coverage by 500 stories per year

expressive responding

giving pollster wrong information as a form of partisan cheerleading

how is affective polarization measured, and what are these things actually measuring?

how people rate the parties (?)

difference between ideological polarization and partisan sorting

ideologically polarized - few independents (and moderates); many people democratic and republican, but there are conservatives and liberals on both sides partisan sorting - all democrats are liberals, all independents are moderate, all republicans are conservative

Source of public opinion: ideology

ideology: an organized set of political attitudes on a varied of issues (liberal and conservative) -in theory ideologies should promote consistency among opinions but in the US, they are primarily the result of coalitional politics --ex. conservatives opposed to abortion but support smaller government (conflicting) --economic and social conservatives: differing opinions but work together -> conflicting ideas -for only the most sophisticated Americans is ideology an important explanation for their opinions -many people fall in the middle (moderate)

problems in interpreting polls: differences by subsets

if you don't look at different subsets, you may draw inaccurate results -ex. a policy unpopular with minorities and women but seems popular when looking at the overall average opinion

two forms of lobbying

inside lobbying: quiet, behind the scenes attempt to make connections with government officials and to persuade officials to help achieve their goals -ex. fundraising for a government official, meetings outside (grassroots) lobbying: trying to mobilize the public to put pressure on officials -ex. protest -Astroturf lobbying: a person asks people to send a script to a member of government --identically worded, not much effect on policymakers (not seen as sincere) most interest groups use both types of lobbying

regardless of the measure, only the most involved Americans have substantially actively polarized

involvement can be measured using a series of simple statements: ex: 1. It is important to share your political opinions with others. 2. It is important to share political news stories with other people. 3. It is important to encourage others to be more involved in politics, etc.

Why is there no relationship between turnout and partisan outcomes?

it is wrong to assume that nonvoters behave the same way as voters with the same demographic characteristics -less involved with politics, weaker partisan values/ties, more affected by environmental factors -comparing voters and non-voters --if non-voters vote, voters are still voting --really want to look at how adding non-voters affects the electorate

Path Dependence and US Health Policy

leading up to WW2, few people had private health insurance -companies were allowed to offer health benefits to employees --this put pressure on other companies to offer them as well -government provides coverage for people not covered through work -now, the majority of people get insurance through jobs --changing this would require very large scale change (which is likely impossible)

free riding

let other people pay the costs while still benefitting nonetheless

Andrea Louise Campbell - How Policies Make Citizens

looks at trends in participatory activities by age since the 1950s and finds that senior participation has been increasing. the age group that participates the most now is 65+. looks at social security statistics over time. the increase in SS coincides with the increase in senior participation argues that Social Security provides evidence of the reciprocal relationship between policy and participation -seniors were not always interested in politics, but are now because of SS --more time, money, (can retire, etc.) -policy led seniors to participate more - self-fulfilling relationship -reciprocal relationship between participation and policy --for younger people it is the opposite: people don't participate, so policy does not reflect their interests)

Voter ID Laws

many states have adopted stricter voter ID laws since the disputed 2000 election -many states require some form of ID at polls -some states enacted new laws making it more difficult to vote

why do people think the public has polarized?

media and exemplification

Schaffner and Luks - Misinformation or Expressive Responding

methods: administered an online survey showing pictures from Trump and Obama's inauguration. there were two conditions: one asking which had more people, the other asking which picture was from which inauguration. the survey also asked respondents about their Trump approval and measured political engagement based off education level findings: highly educated Trump supporters were equally likely to provide the wrong answer in both conditions, while nearly half of less educated Trump voters answered incorrectly for the question about which photograph went with which inauguration -shows how strong partisanship can lead to expressive responding -most educated Republicans were more likely to choose the wrong photo when asked which photo had more people

Prior and Bougher - Like They've Never, Ever Seen In This Country?

methods: analyzed turnout statistics, survey questions, and television viewing related to the election to compare political involvement among election years findings: interest in 2016 election was about the same as it was in 2008 and was on par with interest in other recent presidential elections

Morris Fiorina - Unstable Majorities

methods: data from survey organizations on political beliefs and values over multiple decades presents ample evidence that the public has not polarized -most Americans self-describe as moderate, and this has not changed in the last four decades -even on hot button issues, most Americans have centrist opinions -most Americans have not polarized

Grossman & Hopkins - Asymmetric Politics

methods: gather and analyze various types of data to determine how often and in what contexts parties refer to social groups, ideological concepts, public policy, symbolic imagery, and evidentiary sources to determine differences between the parties argue that the two major parties are fundamentally different -Republican party being an ideological movement -Democratic party being a coalition of groups -More than twice as many interest groups endorse candidates in Democratic Congressional primaries than Republican ones -Democratic delegates to presidential conventions average 35% more organizational memberships than Republican delegates -67.3% of Republican Congressional donors agree that donors are motivated by ideology, vs. 49.2% of Democratic donor -Republican Party platforms are more likely to discuss ideology; Democratic platforms are more likely to discuss social or interest groups -By the 2010s, nearly half of all primary challenges to Republican Members of Congress were motivated by ideology - a rate four times as high as that of Democratic challenges -Republican Congressional candidates are twice as likely as Democrats to emphasize issues concerning the general size of government in their campaign TV ad

Baumgartner et al. - Lobbying and Policy Change

methods: interviewed over 300 lobbyists and government officials across a random sample of 98 issues for four years spanning the transition between the Clinton and Bush presidencies -try to map out political conflict (other groups involved, how much is spent, etc.) findings: -little evidence that interest groups can "buy policy" -they find "virtually no linkage between resources and outcomes"

Arthur Lupia - Shortcuts vs Encyclopedias

methods: people voting on insurance ballot propositions, exit poll, student researchers surveying every 5th person with knowledge-based questions findings: -percent of people voting yes is similar in high knowledge groups and in groups with shortcuts -percent of people voting yes was lower in groups without shortcuts -shortcuts are effective and people need them

Ansolabehere - Effects of Identification Requirements on Voting

methods: surveys conducted in the week after elections. the subjects were asked if the respondent (1) is registered, (2) voted in the election in question, (3) voted at the polls, early, or absentee, (4) was asked to show photo ID, (5) had a registration problem or difficulty obtaining a ballot, and (6) waited to vote. -respondents who showed ID or had registration problems were asked follow-up questions to determine whether they were not allowed to vote, voted a provisional ballot, or allowed to vote -the subjects of one survey were interviewed about their beliefs on the incidence of voter fraud and election tampering as well as their intentions to vote in the future, allowing them to address whether those actually asked to show ID feel that fraud is less of a problem. also used data on state voter ID laws -shows "there is much less to the voter identification controversy than appears in the pages of the court decisions or the debates in public forums" -requests for ID do seem to have a racial bias --In the 2008 primaries, 53% of whites were asked for a photo ID vs. 58% of Hispanics and 73% of African Americans -But the laws don't seem to prevent ANYONE from voting --In 2006, out of 22,211 voters surveyed only 25 said they were asked for ID and then prevented from voting -AND the laws don't seem to discourage people from showing up at the polls in the first place --Of 1,113 nonvoters in one survey, only 4 cited not having ID as why they did not turn out

Daniel Gillion - The Loud Minority

methods: uses ANES data from survey questions such as feeling thermometer questions about the BLM movement -provides evidence that protests can positively impact voter turnout -dependent variable: did a person vote -independent variable: feeling thermometer of BLM movement -in 2016 election, positive sentiment about the BLM movement increased the likelihood that Black and liberal voters would cast a ballot -no evidence of a backlash to protest activity -if enough local protests occurred (minimum 8 events), African American turnout at the district level would be positively impacted too

Path Dependence

might explain why the US has adopted this mix of private and public healthcare - and why universal coverage remains elusive -term borrowed from technology -speaks to how initial events can generate reinforcing feedback that locks a path (of policy) in place --options that were once possible are now impossible

closely but not deeply divided

moderate electorate (most people fall in the middle)

Collective public opinion

more evidence of stability: major events rarely lead Americans to suddenly rethink basic issues -rather, changes happen gradually over time

How cable killed the network news

more options of what to watch, so fewer people watch the news

Don't overestimate the importance of the loudest voices

more partisan sources attract smaller audiences

polls to be uneasy of

online polls which give people the opportunity to express a preference -can be influenced by voluntary response bias polls sponsored by an interest group -sponsored polls by private organizations and a press release publishes their results -interest groups would not publish results that are against their interest -researchers can write leading questions to get the results the group wants. the results are published not questions. the results are misleading without the source

Source of opinion: partisanship

partisan division -people tend to approve more of presidents of their own party -more extreme now than before

problems measuring opinion: social desirability bias

people do not honestly express opinions in a poll because they recognize they hold views that would violate socially accepted values/norms -ex. in August 2020 Pew poll, 32% of Democrats surveyed by phone supported death penalty vs 49% of Democrats surveyed online -research shows this may not be a common problem, even on controversial issues -attempt to reduce: list experiment

knowledge gap

people who are interested in politics know more now than they did in the past (they have access to more information) people who aren't interested know less (they can opt out of getting information)

Most people only show a lukewarm interest in politics and political interest is dispositional rather than situational

people who follow politics most of the time usually decide they are interested in politics in young adulthood, and this becomes a defining characteristic for them -events do not change whether someone is interested in politics -approximately a quarter of the public follows American politics most of the time -many people who are interested are still not active

Why do we have parties

political parties are the byproduct of ambitious politicians seeking to achieve their goals -founders opposed parties, but they formed in the first Congress --people saw they were useful -politicians will turn to parties to solve three basic problems 1. ambition: people want to run for office, if multiple candidates have similar ideals, votes are split among them. parties control these problems because candidates can be nominated, limiting times people take votes from others 2. collective decision making: once a person is elected, they want to get things done in the government. parties solve problems by being a pre-made coalition with people with similar opinions instead of elected officials having to build votes from scratch 3. collective action: office seekers and holders need to mobilize people to vote. parties help with that task and are too useful not to form -when parties can't solve these problems, other means will be embraced (ie personal electoral coalitions)

weighting

poll response percentages of people of underrepresented groups in the sample are adjusted to match the US population -problems: sometimes the small group is inaccurate, pollsters are not always transparent with the process

political socialization

process by which individuals absorb information about politics and form opinions

roll off

process in which voters mark off only the "more important" offices on a lengthy ballot—usually national or statewide offices—and leave the county or local office choices blank -people don't answer every question --about 1/2 of voters skip a major ballot question -roll off is not the result of fatigue/democratic differences --instead, voters systematically skip questions they don't feel they have enough information about

problems in interpreting polls: meanings of words change over time

questions were asked repeatedly over time to see if views change -ex. question on whether people support civil rights may have changing results due to what people think when they hear civil rights

Page and Shapiro - The Rational Public

show that collective public opinion has different properties than individual public opinions -individual opinions can be ill-informed and fluctuate wildly but these random responses tend to cancel out in the miracle of aggregation -collective public opinion thus is stable and rational -most people have a base opinion which when asked enough they will reveal --people who change opinion based on information alter survey results -method: collected 1000s of opinion questions - the same asked repeatedly over time, and found that most results do not change, and when they do it is rational

Green & Gerber - Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Voter Turnout

show that large sums of money are wasted on ineffective GOTV tactics method: list of registered voters are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups. the treatment groups were subjected to different types of efforts to increase voter turnout finding: personal tactics (ex. door to door, volunteer phone calls) work better than impersonal ones (ex. emails, robocalls) -even if these tactics work, they are very costly (paid labor, benefits for volunteers) -results suggest that volunteers put in a lot of time for little payback

Why don't people mobilize to do anything about these problems?

simplest explanation: appeals for action on these kinds of economic problems by nature rely on self-undermining rhetoric -when you talk about these problems, people get anxious. when people are reminded, they are less likely to contribute (the want to take care of themselves first and will need resources in the future) A field experiment also assessed this relationship in the real world -2,861 letters soliciting donations for the Ithaca Health Alliance were sent to potential supporters -Recipients randomly received either a control letter, or a letter that additionally discussed the skyrocketing costs of healthcare -$1,225 was raised in the control group vs. $650 in the treatment group

Medicare

social program providing healthcare benefits to senior citizens Part A: Hospitalization Coverage - financial security for people in older age having extended hospital stay (or in hospice or nursing homes) -financed by taxes, takes 1.5% of each worker's salary Part B: supplementary insurance for outpatient services - if a senior citizen needs to see a specialist doctor -subsidized by taxes, seniors pay a premium of about $130 a month to enroll -can pay premium through SS benefits -saves money Part D: prescription drug benefit -subsidized by taxes, the average senior pays around $40 a month, though premiums vary based on income and plan

period effect

societal events that affect everyone who lived through them -ex. people who lived through watergate have less trust in the government (disclosures of presidential crimes)

problems in interpreting polls: choice of items to analyze

sometimes a public opinion statistic cannot be understood without additional data -ex. low support of Bush during Persian Gulf War, not because the public was anti-war, but because they believed Bush was moving too slowly

Basic facts about social policy

the US welfare state is younger and smaller than most European countries -in countries like Germany, programs were developed in the late 19th century providing aid and income support for older people -the US did not have many until the New Deal the US has a two-track welfare state -track 1: universal entitlement policies that are seen as earned benefits and not as charity (ie Medicare, Social Security) --individuals legally entitled to benefits as long as they meet criteria --broadly popular -track 2: much less popular means-tested policies (ie Medicaid, TANF) --if people make above a certain income or have above a certain level of assets, they are no longer eligible

Do Americans hate welfare?

the majority of Americans oppose cutting programs for education, ss, medicare, anti-poverty

problems measuring opinion: order effects

the order in which questions are given affects how they are answered -ex. if presidential approval is asked at the end of a survey, people are reminded of political issues before answering

How do people respond when their candidate loses?

the pain of losing an election is more powerful than the joy of winning, but people get over it pretty quickly

Educational policy

though the US has lagged behind countries in terms of welfare state development, it has been a leader in public education -36% of all public employment in the US is in education historically, elementary and secondary education has been controlled by local governments, partly because of its sources of funding -statistics show 45.2% of elementary and secondary education funds come from state governments, 39.1% from local governments, and only 8% from federal government -local governments can decide curriculum, hiring, etc. Federal government has had more of a role in financing higher education -Morrill Act (1862) -The Federal government runs or supports the service academies, Gallaudet, and Howard -Aid to students (GI Bill (education for veterans), Work-Study (helps pay for student jobs), Pell Grants, Loan Guarantees, Income Tax Deductions (loans are given to students at a lower interest rate))

empirical connection between opinion and policy

though there is a status quo bias, there is a rough association between what the public wants and what the government does -if 80% of Americans favor a policy change, less than half of the changes are adopted -however, when affluent and poor people differ in their views, government policy is responsive only to the well off

Morrill Act of 1862

transmitted 30k acres of federally owned land for each state per member of Congress in Congressional delegation. The land could be sold with profits being used to fund universities for agriculture, etc. -responsible for the chartering of 70 major universities

exemplification

using individuals to represent a politically divided public

Relations between the vote and presidential approval

when a president is more popular, their party does better in the election there is a positive relationship between economic growth and % of vote

problems measuring opinion: selection bias

when a sample systematically includes/excludes people with certain characteristics -ex. sending cards to people owning homes and cars during the Great Depression -> more wealthy people, more Republican support -solution: random sample -random, representative samples are extraordinarily difficult to obtain today, so many pollsters resort to weighting

problems measuring opinion: response acquiescence

when given the option to agree or disagree, they tend to agree -better questions would present answer options without the use of agree/disagree

voluntary response bias

when people can choose whether to participate, people with strong opinions are oversampled

Lobbying

where interest groups communicate with government officials in order to influence their political decisions

Historical Trends in Turnout

~50-65% turnout average Turnout increase: Jacksonian Innovations (Mass bases parties, spoils system) (early/mid 1800s) -strong political parties -spoils system, rotation in office -people worked hard to get to polls Decrease: Progressive Reforms (Secret Ballot, Civil Service, Direct Primary, Registration) (early 1900s) -people frustrated with urban political machines -machines were non-ideological (transactional: political machines provide services and aid to cultivate support. votes cast were public) -secret ballots made it harder for party bosses to know if their efforts brought votes Decrease: Decline of Unions, Parties in service (mid/late 1900s) -few people working -fewer people working to get people to polls Increase: Polarized competition (early 2000s) -stakes are higher -people working harder to get people to polls