Prof.
Bryan Caplan
bcaplan@gmu.edu
http://www.bcaplan.com
Econ
410
Week 7:
Empirical Accuracy of the Median Voter Model
I.
The Median Voter Model Versus U.S. Constitutional Structure
A.
At least to a rough approximation, U.S. political opinion is
one-dimensional. That dimension is
liberal-conservative.
B.
Liberal-conservative preferences are probably almost always
single-peaked.
C.
So the Median Voter Theorem looks highly relevant, right?
D.
But the issue is more complicated because most countries - especially
the U.S. - are not run by simple majority rule based on one big election.
E.
Instead, the U.S. federal government has three branches, each with
complicated election rules; and under the federal government there are state
governments, each with complicated election rules of their own.
F.
Brief review:
1.
The U.S. president is whoever gets a majority of electoral
votes. In most cases, 100% of a state's
electoral votes go to whichever candidate got the most votes in that
state. Electoral votes are not quite
proportional to population. (See
attachment).
2.
Each state has 2 senators regardless of population.
3.
Each state has House representatives proportional to population. These representatives are elected by
districts into which each state is divided.
4.
Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president but must win 2/3
approval from the Senate.
G.
To become federal laws, bills need either:
1.
House majority, Senate majority, and Presidential cooperation
(signature or failure to veto)
2.
2/3 House and 2/3 Senate
H.
Supreme Court can find laws "unconstitutional" with a
majority vote. Justices stay until they
retire or die. Congress has the power to
change the number of justices, but this hasn't happened for about 100
years. (One attempt in the 1930's
flopped badly).
I.
The Median Voter Theorem, taken strictly, does not predict that the
preference of the median U.S. voter will prevail under these
circumstances. Instead:
1.
The U.S. president will cater to the median electoral vote.
2.
Senators will cater to the median voter in their state.
3.
Representatives will cater to the median voter in their district.
4.
Supreme Court's activity depends on the median justice, who was a
compromise between the President and the Senate at the time of his appointment
(possibly 50 or even 60 years ago!).
II.
The Case for Simple Models: Do Constitutions Really Matter?
A.
Strictly speaking, then, figuring out the exact prediction of the MVT
in the U.S. political system is really complicated.
B.
Perhaps, however, all of these constitutional rules are just
"bells and whistles" that cancel each other out. Then the political system would act "as
if" it were run by the median voter.
C.
Is this crazy? Briefly surveying
political systems around the world, it is rarely easy to show that policy
differences stem from constitutional differences. Variations in voter preferences are, in
contrast, obvious.
1.
Ex: France versus the U.S.
D.
Even dictatorships frequently pay attention to public opinion.
E.
When a political minority manages to foil majority wishes by cleverly
using constitutional rules, those rules frequently change.
F.
Moreover, as a practical matter, starting with simple models is often a
more productive way to analyze real-world problems, even if the simple models
are less realistic.
G.
So: Is the behavior of the U.S. federal government consistent with a
simple median voter story? If not, how
so?
III.
U.S. Government Policy: An Overview
A.
What does the U.S. federal government do? http://www.cbo.gov/budget/data/historical.pdf
B.
Spending (2007)
|
Source |
Share |
|
Social
Security |
21% |
|
Defense |
20% |
|
Domestic
Discretionary |
17% |
|
Medicare |
14% |
|
Net
Interest |
9% |
|
Income
Security |
7% |
|
Medicaid |
7% |
|
Other Retirement/Disability |
6% |
|
Other |
2% |
|
International
Discretionary |
1% |
|
Offsetting
receipts |
-5% |
C.
Taxes (2007)
|
Source |
Share |
|
Individual
Income Taxes |
45% |
|
Social
Insurance Receipts |
34% |
|
Corporate
Income Taxes |
14% |
|
Excise
Taxes |
3% |
|
Other |
4% |
D.
A lot of regulation: Environmental, worker safety, drug safety,
anti-competitive behavior, labor...
IV.
Does Policy Match Public Opinion?
What Are the Unpopular Policies?
A.
Starting with the budget: Social Security and Medicare remain extremely
popular programs; the military is also usually well-regarded. The remaining items are more
contentious.
B.
Broadly defining "welfare" as Medicaid and "Other
Means-Tested" spending, we get 13% of the budget. But:
1.
Few people want to actually abolish these programs
2.
Medicaid also pays for middle-class nursing home residents who have run
through their personal savings.
C.
The national debt is unpopular, but repudiating it would be even less
popular. So "net interest" ultimately
has voter support.
D.
That leaves 25% of the budget for "non-defense discretionary"
and "other" spending. Some of
this spending is "waste. Waste is
unpopular. But outside of isolated
examples of $500 toilet seats, what spending do a majority of Americans agree
is wasteful?
E.
Turning to spending: It is surprising that income and SS taxes are such
a large percentage of the budget. But
insofar as business "passes on" corporate and other taxes, do a
majority of Americans really want significant changes here?
F.
Regulation is more complicated.
Are there majorities in favor of weaker (or stronger) environmental
regulation? Worker safety? Drugs?
G.
Challenge: What policies exist that a majority of American voters
oppose? Consider all the clichés of
politics. Do any hold water?
1.
Relatively weak gun control?
2.
Foreign aid?
3.
NAFTA?
V.
Application: State-Level Policy
A.
There have been a number of empirical studies of state-level policy.
B.
Main findings: Variations in degree of liberalism are strong predictors
of variation in state policy. When
public opinion is liberal (as in NY), policy is liberal; when public opinion is
conservative (as in Colorado), so is policy.
1.
It is hard to convincingly show that public opinion and policy match
each other 1:1, but the evidence is suggestive.
C.
Median vote story: In spite of the complexities of state constitutions,
state-level democracy more-or-less goes along with the preferences of each
state's median voter.
VI.
Adjusting for Bargaining
A.
As we have seen before: If people first vote, then bargain, policy need
not match the median voter's preferences.
Minorities with intense preferences can "bribe" the majority.
B.
Recall the Mean Voter Theorem: With fully efficient bargaining,
policies conform to mean voter preferences issue-by-issue - regardless
of constitutional rules!
C.
Does this shed any light on the survival of apparently unpopular
policies? Are minorities implicitly
bribing majorities?
D.
Ex: Freedom of religion?