Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Women continue to remain seriously underrepresented in the U.S. Congress. Many theories have been advanced to explain why more women do not run for political office including discriminatory treatment by party elites, the gender gap in political ambition and the tendency of potential female candidates to evaluate their qualifications to run for office less favorably than men. Based on the results of a survey of 394 potential candidates in 27 open seat U.S. House districts during the 2006 election this paper examines the impact of sex in the candidate emergence process. The key findings of this study indicate that women were no less likely to be encouraged or discouraged by political party leaders to run for the House. However, women were less likely to believe they were qualified to run for and serve in the U.S. House and expressed less interest in serving in Congress. Ultimately, women were less likely to consider running for the House than men. However, women who evaluated themselves as very qualified were actually more likely to run.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper examines the legislative success of freshmen (first term members) in the House of Representatives elected between 1974 and 1994. I begin by examining the election results of all freshmen elected during this time period and then compare their initial success with their reelection results. Based on the studies of Jacobson (1997) and Herrnson (1995) I work to understand the importance of election results for predicting legislative success. Working with each member’s election results, I juxtapose their success (or failure) with their legislative success during their first term in office. This provides an indicator of whether the "mandate" they receive from their constituents influences their overall behavior and demonstrates the extent freshmen follow the norms and folkways of the House of Representative. I conclude this study by returning to the election results and looking at those members whose first election resulted in a "safe" district to see the impact running in a "safe" district had on their ability to win reelection, their longevity in the House and their legislative success.

Publication Type: Poster
Abstract: This research report shows how the Mathematics in Context approach can be used to design activities that let students to understand the differences between continuous and discrete behavior. We present the results of three consecutive activities for counting the seats of a stadium.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: There are numerous models predicting the partisan distribution of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives using national-level variables. The partisan distribution in Congress is simply an aggregation of 435 separate elections. This paper is part of an ongoing attempt to formulate measures of differential partisan vulnerability in elections from individual election results. The measures constructed are compared to models in the literature. Findings indicate that previous measures of ‘exposure’ have likely overestimated the causal effect of this variable.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Do public approval ratings of Congress affect partisan seat swing in congressional elections? The received wisdom of the scholarly community is that since Americans “love their member of Congress so much more than their Congress,” members’ seats are not at risk even when approval of Congress is low. On the other hand, recent research finds that individual voters who disapprove of Congress are less likely to vote for majority party candidates, all else equal. Yet existing models of congressional seat swing have not tested whether these individual level effects of congressional approval translate into aggregate effects. This study fills this gap in the literature. Using a new dataset of aggregate congressional approval, it finds that the effect of congressional approval is at least as powerful an explanatory factor as presidential approval. Furthermore, a seat swing model that includes congressional approval does a better job explaining recent electoral “surprises” such as majority party gains in the 2002 midterm election and the dramatic majority party losses in 2006.