Chapter 6 The Individual in Democratic Government Figure 6 1 Public Participation in Politics a Hierarchy of Influence Run for Office Protestors Less than 1 Uncertain 3 20 Attend Public Meetings Initiative Ref Direct Democracy 20 50 in western states Increased Impact on Policy Vote for Elected Offices Indirect Democracy 10 60 depending on type of election Non Participants Apart from Presidential Elections 60 Forms of Public Participation Voting Talk about politics Organizations Attending public meetings Contributions Communicating with representatives Campaigning Initiating and repealing laws Initiative and referendum Seeking public office DIFFICULTIES FOR SCIENTIFIC STUDY SELF REPORTED INFORMATION RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY BIAS IN RESPONSE Survey Research and Polling The American Voter The American Voter was published in 1960 and continues to influence the way we think of mass attitudes and behavior This book studied the 1952 and 1956 presidential elections and discussed how class coalitions led to party affiliation These early studies led to the National Elections Study NES which still drives the research of political scientists interested in voting behavior How We Measure Public Opinion 1 2 Question wording You need to know how the questions are phrased Bad questions lead to bad results Sampling In order for a poll to be reliable the sample must be taken accurately The best method is a scientific random sample Such a sample guarantees that each person in the population has the same statistical chance of being selected There are a number of sampling techniques Some of the techniques are poor and should be avoided such as nonstratified sampling straw polls and most nonprobability sampling methods A more reliable nonprobability method is a quota sample in which a pollster ensures representativeness using quotas 3 Contacting respondents The method of contact is important Since 95 of Americans have phones random phone calling would be a valid method Shortcomings of Polling Sampling Error the margin of error or sampling error is quite small if the sample is carefully selected All polls contain some error 3 to 5 is considered a reasonably small rate of error A 3 error rate means that the poll is 97 accurate These rates become extremely important if a race is close Kerry 47 George Bush 48 Margin of Error 5 Do these numbers tell you anything No The contestants are only 1 point apart given the error rate the real race could look like this Kerry 42 47 minus 5 George Bush 53 48 plus 5 Limited Respondent Options have you ever taken a survey or a test and said I don t like any of the answers If the options are not broad enough you get bad results Lack of Information if surveys ask questions about things that the respondents don t understand or don t know about the answers will often be invalid The use of filter questions is helpful here such as have you thought about Intensity polls do not measure intensity well You will learn a position on an issue but not how strong that opinion might be Elitism deliberative polls have been accused of elite bias Time will tell whether this new form of polling will catch on PARTICIPATION UNCOMMON PARTICIPANTS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF POPULATION WHO PARTICIPATES DEPENDS ON TURNOUT TEXAS ELECTORAL TURNOUT Percent Registered Percent Voting Age Population 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002 2006 2010 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 ELECTORAL SUPPORT FOR TEXAS GOVERNOR Percent of Voting Age Population Smith White Richards Clements Clements Briscoe Bush Bush Perry Perry Perry 20 0 18 0 16 0 14 0 12 0 10 0 8 0 6 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002 2006 2010 PERCENT OF TEXAS VOTING AGE POPULATION REGISTERED EXPLANATIONS OF NON VOTING ALIENATION COST BENEFIT SATISFACTION Figure 6 4 Turnout in Various Elections Between 1960 and 2008 70 l n o i t a u p o P e g A g n i t o V f o e g a t n e c r e P 60 50 40 30 Governor on year President U S House on year Governor off year U S House off year 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 Year DECLINING TURNOUT PARTY GROUP LINKAGES DECLINING COMPETITION VOTER EXHAUSTION Why do Americans vote less Lack of party group linkage Registration restrictions Non compulsory voting Voter exhaustion Table 6 2 Voting Turnout in Democracies Close to 2000 Turnout as Percentage of Eligible Voters Turnout as Percentage of Eligible Voters Turnout as Percentage of Eligible Voters Country Country Country Papua New Guinea Greece Iceland Italy Israel Belgium Denmark Australia Turkey Argentina Brazil Sweden Czech New Zealand 98 8 89 0 86 2 84 9 84 4 83 2 83 1 81 7 80 4 79 4 78 5 77 7 76 7 76 1 Germany Spain Costa Rica Norway Chili Austria Netherlands Portugal Taiwan Ireland India Finland South Africa 75 3 73 8 73 7 73 1 73 1 72 6 70 1 69 3 67 8 66 7 65 5 65 2 63 9 France Russia Japan United Kingdom South Korea Canada Mexico Poland United States Singapore Switzerland Pakistan Egypt 59 9 59 9 59 0 57 6 55 7 54 3 48 2 47 6 46 6 35 4 34 9 31 5 30 4 Figure 6 2 Initiative and Referendum WA OR NV CA UT CO ID MT WY AZ NM AK HI ME VT NH MA CT RI NJ DE NY PA MD VA ND SD NE KS OK TX MN IA MO AR LA W I M I IN IL OH WV KY TN MS AL GA NC SC FL Neither Referendum Only Initiative Only Initiative and Referendum Table 6 1 Initiative Procedures Constitutional Amendments State AK AZ AR CA CO MD MA MI MS MO MT NE NV NM ND OH OK OR SD UT WA WY Neither Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Indirect Direct Indirect Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Direct Statutes Indirect Direct Direct Direct Direct Neither Indirect Indirect Neither Direct Direct Direct Indirect Neither Direct Indirect Direct Direct Direct Both Both Indirect Figure 6 3 Examples of Voting Example 1 The Easy Choice Issue You Cand Cand Rational 1 Pro B A Pro Con Candidate A Vote Example 2 A Difficult Choice Issue You Cand Cand Rational Vote 1 2 3 4 Pro Pro Pro Pro B Con Con Candidate A A Pro Pro Con Con Con Pro Figure 6 3 Examples of Voting Example 3 A More Difficult Choice Issue You Cand Cand Rational Vote 1 2 3 4 Pro Very Important Pro Pro Pro A Pro Pro B Con Con Con Con Pro Pro Candidate A Figure 6 3 Examples of Voting Example 4 A Quite Difficult Choice Issue You Cand Cand Rational Vote 1 2 3 4 Pro Very Important Pro Pro Pro A Pro Pro B Pro Con Candidate A Figure 6 3 Examples of Voting Example 5 The Typical and Most Difficult Choice Issue You
View Full Document
Unlocking...