IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pclm00/0000043.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Electoral appeal of climate policies: The Green New Deal and the 2020 U.S. House of Representatives elections

Author

Listed:
  • Meagan Carmack
  • Nives Dolšak
  • Aseem Prakash

Abstract

Climate issues widely feature in policy discussions, but it is not clear if voters reward politicians who champion climate policies. In some countries, candidates and parties with an explicit climate agenda have done well in elections (Switzerland and Germany being recent examples) while in other cases, voters have either ignored climate issues or punished candidates/parties for their climate positions (Australia, the U.K., and Canada). Focusing on the U.S. as a case study, we examine the electoral appeal of the Green New Deal (GND) legislative proposal which outlined a vision for a sustainable and equitable economy. Different versions of the GND policy idea have been adopted across the world. The GND was introduced in the US Congress in 2019 and was endorsed by 102 of the 232 House Democrats, but not by a single Republican. Our analysis finds an association between Democrats’ endorsement of the GND and a 2.01 percentage point increase in their vote share, even after controlling for the 2018 vote share. Unlike most western democracies, the U.S. is a laggard on climate issues. Yet, we find that U.S. voters reward legislators who advocate an ambitious climate policy agenda.

Suggested Citation

  • Meagan Carmack & Nives Dolšak & Aseem Prakash, 2022. "Electoral appeal of climate policies: The Green New Deal and the 2020 U.S. House of Representatives elections," PLOS Climate, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(6), pages 1-12, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pclm00:0000043
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pclm.0000043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0000043
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/climate/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0000043&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000043?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lohmann, Susanne, 1993. "A Signaling Model of Informative and Manipulative Political Action," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 319-333, June.
    2. David M. Konisky & Llewelyn Hughes & Charles H. Kaylor, 2016. "Extreme weather events and climate change concern," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 533-547, February.
    3. Kai Schulze, 2021. "Policy Characteristics, Electoral Cycles, and the Partisan Politics of Climate Change," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(2), pages 44-72, Spring.
    4. Jamie L. Carson & Gregory Koger & Matthew J. Lebo & Everett Young, 2010. "The Electoral Costs of Party Loyalty in Congress," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 598-616, July.
    5. Quek, Kai, 2021. "Four Costly Signaling Mechanisms," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(2), pages 537-549, May.
    6. David S. Lee & Enrico Moretti & Matthew J. Butler, 2004. "Do Voters Affect or Elect Policies? Evidence from the U. S. House," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 807-859.
    7. Evan J. Ringquist & Carl Dasse, 2004. "Lies, Damned Lies, and Campaign Promises? Environmental Legislation in the 105th Congress," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(2), pages 400-419, June.
    8. David Konisky & Llewelyn Hughes & Charles Kaylor, 2016. "Extreme weather events and climate change concern," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 533-547, February.
    9. Basinger, Scott J. & Lavine, Howard, 2005. "Ambivalence, Information, and Electoral Choice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(2), pages 169-184, May.
    10. Katagiri, Azusa & Min, Eric, 2019. "The Credibility of Public and Private Signals: A Document-Based Approach," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(1), pages 156-172, February.
    11. Stephen Ansolabehere & Philip Edward Jones, 2010. "Constituents’ Responses to Congressional Roll‐Call Voting," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 583-597, July.
    12. Elisabeth R. Gerber & Justin H. Phillips, 2003. "Development Ballot Measures, Interest Group Endorsements, and the Political Geography of Growth Preferences," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 625-639, October.
    13. Tufte, Edward R., 1975. "Determinants of the Outcomes of Midterm Congressional Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 69(3), pages 812-826, September.
    14. Abel Gustafson & Seth A. Rosenthal & Matthew T. Ballew & Matthew H. Goldberg & Parrish Bergquist & John E. Kotcher & Edward W. Maibach & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2019. "The development of partisan polarization over the Green New Deal," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(12), pages 940-944, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Azusa Uji & Jaehyun Song & Nives Dolšak & Aseem Prakash, 2023. "Pursuing decarbonization along with national security: Assessing public support for the Thacker Pass lithium mine," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(1), pages 1-18, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Otrachshenko, Vladimir & Popova, Olga, 2024. "Environment vs. Economic Growth: Do Environmental Preferences Translate Into Support for Green Parties?," IZA Discussion Papers 17475, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2023. "Drought Exposure and Accuracy: Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Beliefs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 649-672, August.
    3. Jeremiah Bohr, 2017. "Is it hot in here or is it just me? Temperature anomalies and political polarization over global warming in the American public," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 271-285, May.
    4. Grechyna, Daryna, 2025. "Raising awareness of climate change: Nature, activists, politicians?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    5. Lackner, Teresa & Fierro, Luca E. & Mellacher, Patrick, 2025. "Opinion dynamics meet agent-based climate economics: An integrated analysis of carbon taxation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    6. Best, Rohan & Burke, Paul J., 2018. "Adoption of solar and wind energy: The roles of carbon pricing and aggregate policy support," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 404-417.
    7. Dai, Zhifeng & Hu, Juan & Liu, Xinheng & Yang, Mi, 2024. "ynamic time-domain and frequency-domain spillovers and portfolio strategies between climate change attention and energy-relevant markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    8. Donatella Baiardi, 2021. "What do you think about climate change?," Working Papers 477, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2021.
    9. Alan E. Stewart & Harrison E. Chapman & Jackson B. L. Davis, 2023. "Anxiety and Worry about Six Categories of Climate Change Impacts," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(1), pages 1-24, December.
    10. Paola D'Orazio, 2022. "Mapping the emergence and diffusion of climate-related financial policies: Evidence from a cluster analysis on G20 countries," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 169, pages 135-147.
    11. Björn Kauder & Niklas Potrafke, 2022. "Rewarding conservative politicians? Evidence from voting on same-sex marriage," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 161-172, April.
    12. Baiardi, Donatella & Morana, Claudio, 2021. "Climate change awareness: Empirical evidence for the European Union," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    13. Björn Kauder & Niklas Potrafke & Marina Riem, 2017. "Do Parties Punish MPs for Voting Against the Party Line?," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 63(3), pages 317-332.
    14. Sitong Yang & Shouwei Li & Xue Rui & Tianxiang Zhao, 2024. "The impact of climate risk on the asset side and liability side of the insurance industry: evidence from China," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 1-51, June.
    15. Brown, Pike & Walsh, Patrick & Booth, Pam, 2020. "Environmental signalling & expectations of future drought: Evidence from panel data," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305239, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Fang, Yan Ru & Hossain, MD Shouquat & Peng, Shuan & Han, Ling & Yang, Pingjian, 2024. "Sustainable energy development of crop straw in five southern provinces of China: Bioenergy production, land, and water saving potential," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    17. Llewelyn Hughes & David M. Konisky & Sandra Potter, 2020. "Extreme weather and climate opinion: evidence from Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 723-743, November.
    18. Víctor Rincón & Javier Velázquez & Derya Gülçin & Aida López-Sánchez & Carlos Jiménez & Ali Uğur Özcan & Juan Carlos López-Almansa & Tomás Santamaría & Daniel Sánchez-Mata & Kerim Çiçek, 2023. "Mapping Priority Areas for Connectivity of Yellow-Winged Darter ( Sympetrum flaveolum , Linnaeus 1758) under Climate Change," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-39, January.
    19. Astghik Mavisakalyan & Vladimir Otrachshenko & Olga Popova, 2023. "Does democracy protect the environment? The role of the Arctic Council," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(5), pages 1-21, May.
    20. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2022. "Drought exposure and accuracy: Motivated reasoning in climate change beliefs," Working Papers 2022.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pclm00:0000043. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: climate (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/climate .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.