Policy Responsiveness Lecture 2 Today •Theory of policy responsiveness •Techniques for studying policy responsiveness •More nuanced results •Ideas for research • • 1. Theory of policy responsiveness What is policy responsiveness? •Politicians follow will of public •Congruence: exact match between public preferences and policy •Responsiveness: policy changes with changes in preferences •But •Should public and policy converge exactly? •With no time delay? •On all issues? Potential mechanisms •Incentives – rational anticipation •Politicians afraid of consequences of not listening: lose elections, protest, revolution •Requires that voters (i) know what politicians do and (ii) punish them for doing different things •Selection of types •Voters choose politicians that have similar beliefs and values •Politicians then carry out those values •Policy changes with elections •Altruism •Politicians want to please people, want to be loved Case for responsiveness •Fundamental idea of democracy: people rule •Citizens know what is best for them •Wisdom of crowds •Politicians are corrupt and self-interested, need to be controlled and disciplined Case against responsiveness •Citizens have no real opinions about most issues, especially complicated ones – can’t provide guidance •Citizens have uninformed or bad opinions •Pandering: politicians try to please voters with policies that they know will have negative effects •Citizens can be manipulated by politicians or groups •Leadership is a good thing •Who are the great democratic politicians? •Brecht: unhappy is the land that needs a hero When will responsiveness yield the best policies? •Best = policies in the real interests of citizens •Substantive representation •Citizens need to actually know and prefer the policies with the best consequences for society •Or the aggregate average of opinions somehow = the best policies •How often does public desire what is right? •Where would you trust the Czech public? •Where would you not trust it? • 2. Techniques for studying responsiveness The major problems •Measures of what the public wants •Can they identify exact policies? •Or just more/less/about the same? •Measures of policy/actions of politicians •Controls for other causes of policy and opinion •Reverse causality: policy => preferences Dyadic representation •Miller and Stokes (1963) •Public opinion on issue positions in US Congressional districts •Link to preferences and behavior (roll-call votes) of representatives in those districts •Results: good correspondence for more salient issues •Sometimes through election, sometimes anticipation •Problems •Need a common scale of measurement •Roll call votes ≠ policy (position-taking) •Who is influencing whom? What about proportional systems like CZ •Can’t link citizens with individual MPs •Multiple MPs represent each district •Maybe for Senate? •Try to link parties with their voters •Opinions of party voters •Opinions of MPs or placement of party on left-right spectrum Party representation •Measure preferences/ideology of supporters of each party as well as parties •Do supporters have same positions as party? •But is it true that parties only represent their own voters? •Results from postcommunist countries •Good correspondence •But parties tend to exaggerate differences between citizens •Problems •Are we measuring policy? •Are we showing causality? How to measure positions/ideologies of parties? •Survey of legislators – opinions on policies •Sincerity? Is it policy? •Roll-call votes in parliament •Party discipline, strategic voting •Interest group evaluations of MPs •Expert survey of positions of parties •Lists of major legislation (label as left or right) Collective representation •Gather all national-level surveys asking about concrete policy changes •Eg, Do you support capital punishment? •Is the change made or not within 4 years? •Results •50-70% of time government does what citizens want in established democracies •Problems •Depends on issues that surveys cover •Is it causality or just correspondence? How do we isolate causality? •Control for other factors •Media, interest groups, parties, civil society •Very few studies do this •Time-series •Responsiveness is a temporal idea: changes in public opinion lead to change in policy •Do changes in public opinion precede changes in policy? One clever way •Look at all significant changes in public opinion (Page & Shapiro 1983) •What percentage of changes are followed by a change in policy? •In US, 2/3 of changes in public opinion => change in policy in same direction Rights of same-sex couples in CZ Can we be more systematic? •Dynamic representation •Policy mood: do citizens want large, more active government or smaller, less active government •Advantage: long time-series, other policy issues come and go •Disadvantage: very abstract •Measures of policy •Interest group ratings of MPs •Roll-call votes •Number of liberal/conservative laws 6a00d83451d25c69e2011570963e87970b-pi (2846×1946) Policy mood in US Putting policy and public opinion together Results •Strong responsiveness for all four branches •1 point change in mood => 1 point change in policy •Change is fast •For legislature, public opinion => policy within 1 year •For Supreme Court: 2 years •Differences across branches •House of Representatives: direct effect of public opinion strongest •Senate: indirect effect through elections stronger •President: change in party of president has largest effects • Why are courts responsive to public opinion? •Judges have political motivations •Court depends on other actors for enforcement •No control over police, bureaucracy •If they take unpopular actions, then other actors (executive, legislative) won’t enforce •Court needs to maintain legitimacy •Countermajoritarian dilemma 3. Some more nuanced results Lumpers and splitters •What are politicians responsive to: •General public mood (lumpers) •Opinion on specific issues (splitters) •Does politician say: “The public’s mood is becoming more hostile to government, let’s think of ways to cut government” •Or: “The public dislikes Church restitution, let’s limit or stop Church restitution” Druckman and Jacobs (2006) •Private polls conducted by Richard Nixon •When Nixon has specific policy data, he uses it •Tries to win over general public •When an issue is not so important, he doesn’t collect data about specific policy and focuses on general ideology trends •Appeals to his core supporters When are politicians most responsive? •When elections are near •Public has short time horizon – only remembers most recent policy when voting •Honeymoon effect – politicians have more freedom at start of term, mandate to rule •When popularity is moderate •High popularity (eg, 70% approval) – I can do what I want and ignore the public •Low popularity (eg, 30% approval) – Small policy changes won’t help me, so just do what I want Public as thermostat •Public can influence policy, but policy can also influence public •Public may adjust preferences depending on what policymakers do •If policy becomes too liberal, public becomes more conservative •Thermostat adjusts heat to keep temperature constant •Spending preferences of public (“Should we increase or decrease spending on defense?”) and actual spending •Policy has negative affect on public opinion •More spending => preferences for less spending Gaps in our knowledge •To what extent do politicians manipulate public opinion? •How do they do it? Can you see it in CZ? •Can we control for other causes of policy? •Media, interest groups, civil society •What about inequalities in responsiveness? •Do politicians listen to some groups more than others? •Most studies focus on average person Collective representation in CZ •All questions on policy issues asked in national surveys of public opinion in the Czech Republic from 1990 to 2009 •Do you support or oppose tuition fees for university? •To date 586 questions from CVVM •Determine whether policy adopted within 4 years • Preliminary results •59% of policies supported by majority adopted •32% opposed by majority adopted •Altogether 62% of policies fit majority preferences •Comparable to studies of US, France, & Germany • What are policy areas where CZ politicians don’t listen to public? •Public opposed but adopted –Social policy cuts (copays, retirement age) –Church restitution (but opposite in past) –Missile defense? •Public supports but not adopted –Restrict MP immunity –Referenda –Death penalty –Direct presidential election (in past) •