Search

The literature on attitudes toward government budgets has been dominated by two distinct approaches, jointly studying both sides of the ledger (holistic approaches) and studying attitudes over spending and revenue separately (singular approaches). Despite both approaches being widely adopted, scholars have given limited attention to testing empirically how methodological differences in the approaches may affect measures of fiscal attitudes and the inferences we draw from those measures. In this paper, we ask, "Do the different approaches to studying the budget alter mass attitudes toward spending and taxes, and if so, how?" Using data from an Amazon MTurk survey experiment, we find that spending choices differ significantly (attitude instability) across the two approaches. On the revenue side, our results show that choices over taxation tend to remain consistent and stable, regardless of whether the choices include only taxes or the combination of taxes and spending. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Do incumbents dominate non-partisan elections because of an especially large personal vote? This question has important implications for understanding the causes of incumbent success and the benefits or drawbacks of non-partisan elections. This paper uses a natural experiment, combined with three original datasets, to estimate the size, persistence, and consequences of the personal vote in a large non-partisan city election. We first use individual-level survey data to show that individuals assigned quasi-randomly to a new incumbent are substantially less likely to support the incumbent. We use a second survey, one year later, to demonstrate the persistence of this effect. Finally, we use historical election results to simulate the electoral consequences of the personal vote; we find that the personal vote is sufficiently large to affect one in four incumbent races. We conclude that the personal vote, while large and important, is not sufficient to explain incumbent dominance in non-partisan contests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Foreign Policy Journal (CFPJ) is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Do consumer and producer considerations influence support for future trade agreements and, if so, how? Prior research has pitted self-interest-based explanations of trade preferences against perception-based explanations, finding limited empirical support for the self-interest hypothesis. Instead of treating perceptions and self-interest as competing explanations, we construct a theoretical model with perceptions of trade as a mediating factor linking self-interest and support for prospective free trade agreements (FTAs). Using new survey data collected by the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, we examine how two distinct forms of self-interest (consumer and producer considerations) can indirectly shape attitudes toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). We find that the impact of respondents' income level (proxying producer considerations) and their recognition of the price-lowering effect of international trade (proxying consumer considerations) on support for the TPP are largely mediated by perceptions of trade. Together the findings suggest a middle ground between the two sides of the self-interest debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]