IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v39y1995i1p168-182.html

The Electoral Consequences of Voting to Declare War

Author

Listed:
  • James L. Regens
  • Ronald Keith Gaddie

    (Tulane University)

  • Brad Lockerbie

    (University of Georgia)

Abstract

The conventional wisdom of national elections suggests that there are electoral costs associated with opposing declarations of war. However, an alternative literature contends that the negative electoral consequences of waging war may be borne by legislators who supported war, especially those members of the majority party. The authors test this assumption by examining the electoral consequences of supporting or opposing the declarations of war for the Mexican-American War, World War I, and the 1991 resolution to use force in the Persian Gulf. The results of their analysis of House elections indicate that although electoral costs were borne for opposing World War I, legislators who dissented often preselected themselves out of Congress through retirement or pursuit of other office. No evidence of electoral costs is evident in the wake of the Persian Gulf War, due in part to the influence of intervening events during the long period between the end of the war and the 1992 election.

Suggested Citation

  • James L. Regens & Ronald Keith Gaddie & Brad Lockerbie, 1995. "The Electoral Consequences of Voting to Declare War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 39(1), pages 168-182, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:39:y:1995:i:1:p:168-182
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002795039001007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002795039001007
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002795039001007?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. Miller, Warren E. & Stokes, Donald E., 1963. "Constituency Influence in Congress," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(1), pages 45-56, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Weßels, Bernhard & Rose, Richard, 2021. "Do populist values or civic values drive support for referendums in Europe?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 60(2), pages 359-375.
    2. Dennis, Christopher & Bishin, Benjamin & Nicolaou, Politimy, 2000. "Constituent diversity and congress: the case of NAFTA," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 349-360, July.
    3. Dennis, Christopher, 1998. "Support for campaign spending limitations in the U. S. senate: The role of party, ideology and electoral security," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 641-649.
    4. Alan E. Wiseman, 2006. "A Theory of Partisan Support and Entry Deterrence in Electoral Competition," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 123-158, April.
    5. Tanguiane, Andranick S., 2022. "Analysis of the 2021 Bundestag elections. 1/4. Representativeness of the parties and the Bundestag," Working Paper Series in Economics 151, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    6. Christopher J Williams, 2016. "Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 504-521, September.
    7. Mansbridge, Jane, 2008. "A "Selection Model" of Political Representation," Working Paper Series rwp08-010, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    8. Thomas J. Hayes, 2014. "Do Citizens Link Attitudes with Preferences? Economic Inequality and Government Spending in the “New Gilded Age”," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(2), pages 468-485, June.
    9. Olle Folke & Johanna Rickne, 2020. "Who wins preference votes? An analysis of party loyalty, ideology, and accountability to voters," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 11-35, January.
    10. Mark Souva, 2005. "Foreign Policy Determinants: Comparing Realist and Domestic-Political Models of Foreign Policy," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(2), pages 149-163, April.
    11. Xiao Tang & Weiwei Chen & Tian Wu, 2018. "Do Authoritarian Governments Respond to Public Opinion on the Environment? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-15, February.
    12. Tanguiane, Andranick S., 2025. "Analysis of the 2025 Bundestag elections. Part 3 of 4: The third vote perspective Bundestag," Working Paper Series in Economics 169, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    13. Christian R. Grose & Keesha M. Middlemass, 2010. "Listen to What I Say, Not How I Vote: Congressional Support for the President in Washington and at Home," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(1), pages 143-167, March.
    14. Ftergioti, Stamatia, 2017. "Neighbors and Friends: The Effect of Globalization on Party Positions," MPRA Paper 76662, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Jeffrey Harden & Thomas Carsey, 2012. "Balancing constituency representation and party responsiveness in the US Senate: the conditioning effect of state ideological heterogeneity," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 137-154, January.
    16. Sarah Harrison, 2020. "Democratic Frustration: Concept, Dimensions and Behavioural Consequences," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, February.
    17. Scott Crichlow, 2002. "Legislators' Personality Traits and Congressional Support for Free Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(5), pages 693-711, October.
    18. Sara Binzer Hobolt & Robert Klemmemsen, 2005. "Responsive Government? Public Opinion and Government Policy Preferences in Britain and Denmark," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53(2), pages 379-402, June.
    19. J. Lawrence Broz, 2008. "Congressional voting on funding the international financial institutions," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 351-374, December.
    20. Bartels, Larry, 2005. "Economic Inequality and Political Representation," Papers 08-11-2005, Princeton University, Research Program in Political Economy.

    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:sae:jocore:v:39:y:1995:i:1:p:168-182. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.