Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T20:00:08.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Partisan Politics and Congressional Election Prospects: Evidence from the Iowa Electronic Markets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2015

Joyce E. Berg ,
Christopher E. Penney  and
Thomas A. Rietz
Joyce E. Berg
Affiliation:
University of Iowa
Christopher E. Penney
Affiliation:
University of Iowa
Thomas A. Rietz
Affiliation:
University of Iowa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using the Iowa Electronic Markets (IEM), this article assesses the political impact of several important events during the fall of 2013: the US government shutdown, the Senate elimination of filibusters for presidential nominations (i.e., the “nuclear option”), and the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (i.e., ObamaCare). Did these events have meaningful effects on congressional control prospects in the 2014 election? According to IEM price changes, Republican chances fell dramatically when the government shut down, and they did not recover on resolution. Eliminating filibusters had a negative impact on Democratic chances. Various aspects of the ObamaCare rollout and reporting, as well as new announcements that incumbents would not run for reelection, had little effect. In contrast, the budget resolution reinforced the status quo. Overall, political rhetoric does not appear to affect congressional control prospects. Instead, actions matter: deliberate partisan actions of Congress adversely affect the initiating party’s prospects, whereas bipartisan initiatives help the party that initiates the bipartisan effort.

Type
Features
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 48 , Issue 4 , October 2015 , pp. 573 - 578
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abramowitz, Alan I. 1988. “Explaining Senate Election Outcomes.” American Political Science Review 82 (2): 385–403.Google Scholar
Berg, Joyce E., and Rietz, Thomas A.. 2012. “Longshots, Overconfidence and Efficiency on the Iowa Electronic Market.” Working Paper, University of Iowa, Henry B. Tippie College of Business.Google Scholar
Berg, Joyce, Forsythe, Robert, Nelson, Forrest, and Rietz, Thomas. 2008. “Results from a Dozen Years of Election Futures Markets Research.” In Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, ed. Plott, Charles R. and Smith, Vernon L., 742–51. Amsterdam: North-Holland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, Joyce E., Nelson, Forrest D., and Rietz, Thomas A.. 2008. “Prediction Market Accuracy in the Long Run.” International Journal of Forecasting 24 (2): 285–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bondarenko, Oleg, and Bossaerts, Peter. 2000. “Expectations and Learning in Iowa.” Journal of Banking & Finance 24 (9): 1535–55.Google Scholar
Borch, Karl. 1960. “The Safety Loading of Reinsurance Premiums.” Scandinavian Actuarial Journal 43 (3–4): 163–84.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael, and Tien, Charles. 2011. “Election Forecasting.” In The Oxford Handbook of Economic Forecasting, ed. Clements, Michael and Hendry, David, 655–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mann, Thomas E. 2007. “Polarizing the House of Representatives: How Much Does Gerrymandering Matter?” In Red and Blue Nation? Characteristics and Causes of America’s Polarized Politics, Volume 1, ed. Nivola, Pietro S. and Brady, David W., 263–83. Baltimore: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Peters, Jeremy W. 2013. “3 House Retirements Complicate Outlook for Midterms.” New York Times, December 18, 2013.Google Scholar
Saltzman, Evan, and Eibner, Christine. 2014. Evaluating the “Keep Your Own Health Plan” Fix. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
Stegmaier, Mary, and Norpoth, Helmut. 2013. “Forecasting, Election.” In Oxford Bibliographies in Political Science, ed. Valelly, Rick. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Berg supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Berg supplementary material(File)
File 19.4 KB