Does Presidential Primary and Caucus Order Affect Policy? Evidence from Federal Procurement Spending

By Taylor, Andrew J. | Political Research Quarterly, June 2010 | Go to article overview

Does Presidential Primary and Caucus Order Affect Policy? Evidence from Federal Procurement Spending


Taylor, Andrew J., Political Research Quarterly


This article examines the contention that states with early presidential primaries or caucuses receive disproportionate distributive policy benefits. The basic theory is that presidential candidates pledge more federal spending per capita to these states because doing well in their contests is critical to capturing the nomination. Candidates then deliver on these promises if they win the White House. Using by-state procurement per capita data from 1984 to 2004, four conditional hypotheses derived from this thinking are tested. The results show that primary or caucus order matters only during competitive nominations when the ultimately victorious presidential candidate won the state's contest.

Keywords: presidency research; elections and voting behavior

There is a great deal of evidence to show that the results of the early state contests for delegates to national party conventions do much to determine who wins presidential nominations. A number of scholars argue that victory or strong performances in the first primaries and caucuses, especially those in Iowa and New Hampshire, can provide momentum that elevates a candidate in public opinion polls, generates favorable media coverage, and assists in fund-raising. Indeed, the benefits are significant enough so as to make doing well in early contests critical to winning the nomination (Bartels 1985, 1988; Mutz 1995; Norrander 2006; Orren and Polsby 1987; Steger, Dowdle, and Adkins 2004).1 Early nominating contests are also important because they exert a winnowing effect, and those who do poorly in them are often forced to drop out (Norrander 2000, 2006; Steger, Hickman, and Yohn 2002).2

Although much research has been done on the effect of primary and caucus order on nomination outcomes, none has been undertaken on its influence over policy outcomes. On the surface, this makes sense. To get to the White House, a presidential candidate must also persuade the general electorate to vote for her. Moreover, the nomination frequently goes uncontested-generally, when a sitting president is running for reelection. On such occasions, the nominee does not have to be sensitive to primary and caucus order.

But there is anecdotal evidence that nomination contest order matters to policy outcomes. Presidential aspirants, it seems, attempt to outdo each other with promises to promote the policy interests of states with early contests. In 2004, for instance, Democratic candidates, such as Howard Dean and John Kerry, continually iterated their support for ethanol subsidies. Ethanol is an energy product made from corn, a crop that is important to the economy of Iowa, the state with the first contest.3 In 1992, Bill Clinton was criticized as a "pander bear" by opponent Paul Tsongas for promises of favorable policy he made to voters residing in early primary states, such as New Hampshire and Florida.

The recent "front-loading" of the nomination contests-that has occurred as states have brought their primaries and caucuses toward the beginning of the process so as to greatly shorten it (W. Mayer and Busch 2004)-seems to be at least partially the product of policy considerations. The push to move the Florida contest toward the beginning of the 2008 process was predicated on the idea that it would force the presidential candidates to take favorable positions on issues of importance to the residents of the state (Bosquet 2007). The same can be said for California. The state's assembly speaker, Fabian Nunez, put it this way: "Right now, California gets back 79 cents for every dollar we send to D.C. Early primary states . . . do much better. I think the prospective nominees should be vetted on their views on this issue" (Skelton 2007, 3B). Jim Brulte, a Republican leader in the state, remarked, "When you come and campaign in California, you learn about California. And when you learn about California, that makes you a better president for California" (Steinhauer 2007, A15). …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Does Presidential Primary and Caucus Order Affect Policy? Evidence from Federal Procurement Spending
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.