dc.description | Thesis (Ph.D.)--Georgetown University, 2010.; Includes bibliographical
references.; Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format. This dissertation addresses whether the
outcomes of open seat and congressional special elections are more indicative of local factors
or national partisan tides within the electorate. While political pundits often imbue
electoral outcomes with national significance, academic explanations of open seat and
congressional special elections stress the importance of candidate resources and district
demographics in deciding the contests. Pitting the conventional wisdom as presented by the
national media against the candidate-constituency model advanced in the political science
literature, this dissertation investigates, and assesses the accuracy of, the divergent
interpretations of open seat and congressional special elections presented by political
pundits in the national media and political scientists. Using OLS regression to analyze all
open seat and congressional special elections from 1977-2008 this dissertation concludes that
while open seat elections may reflect referenda effects against the incumbent president's
party, national factors are only directly decisive if the open seat election is close and
presidential approval or the policy mood of the electorate shifts drastically. On the other
hand, congressional special elections are decidedly local affairs affected by candidate
spending and the percent Hispanic residing in the district. Further analysis also uncovered
that congressional special elections were not unique from open seat elections. Hence, this
dissertation concluded any differences between open seat and congressional special elections
were largely a product of "strategic politicians" and the national media's
ability to prime national concerns through the increased publicity that accompanies open seat
elections, but not congressional special elections. In sum, this research determined the
largely local nature of open seat and congressional special elections. Although pundits can
correctly paint open seat elections as reflecting referenda effects, the remainder of the
conventional wisdom as portrayed by the national media is largely incorrect. This research
also lends clarity to the previously disparate findings presented within the scarce scholarly
research devoted to congressional special elections and moves academia one step closer to a
consensus regarding the local nature of congressional special election contests. The
implications of this research for potential candidates, American political parties, and
American democracy are discussed in the conclusion. | en |