How Voters Reward Transfers Compared to Competence: Explaining Pocketbook Voting
30 Pages Posted: 11 Oct 2007 Last revised: 13 Apr 2008
Date Written: March 28, 2008
Abstract
This paper uses state-level election returns and individual-level survey data to show that American voters have systematically punished the incumbent party for extreme weather in presidential election years. A moderate drought has cost the incumbent party an average of 2.6 percent of the presidential vote in rural areas, with no significant effect in urban and suburban areas. Weather's impact has diminished over time as agriculture's economic importance has decreased. The results indicate that a voter's partisan preferences and education predict his rationality. Election-year weather does not significantly affect the behavior of moderate voters or those voters who have attended college.
Keywords: voting behavior, natural disasters, government spending
JEL Classification: D72
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Are CEOS Really Paid Like Bureaucrats?
By Brian J. Hall and Jeffrey B. Liebman
-
Are CEOS Really Paid Like Bureaucrats?
By Brian J. Hall and Jeffrey B. Liebman
-
The Other Side of the Tradeoff: The Impact of Risk on Executive Compensation
-
Good Timing: CEO Stock Option Awards and Company News Announcements
-
Good Timing: CEO Stock Option Awards and Company News Announcements
-
The Use of Equity Grants to Manage Optimal Equity Incentive Levels
By John E. Core and Wayne R. Guay
-
The Other Side of the Tradeoff: the Impact of Risk on Executive Compensation
-
Stock Options for Undiversified Executives
By Brian J. Hall and Kevin J. Murphy