A Neoinstitutional Theory of Senate Voting on Supreme Court Justices

尽管参议院在确认 最高法院法官，对影响投票的因素的了解 参议员是稀疏。 该项目通过以下方式来解决这一缺陷： 发展了一种唱名投票理论，将参议员描绘成 主要是为了他们的利益。 参议员们， 然而，有自己的个人喜好的组成， 最高法院。 此外，总统可以带来奖励， 惩罚参议员试图影响他们的投票。 因此，参议员必须权衡1） 支持对立的成分欲望，2）追求自己的 政策目标，3）支持或反对总统的提名人。 为了评估参议员们对寻求 影响他们对确认的投票，这个项目开发了一个可测试的 公众舆论、被提名人的意识形态以及 围绕提名的政治环境汇集在一起， 影响参议员的投票 模型的组成部分包括 总统的声望和权力， 无论是参议员还是他们的选民， 这是一个很大的问题，也是一个很大的问题。 该理论在2，214张个人确认票上进行了测试， 汤姆·克拉克（1949）通过安东尼·肯尼迪（1988）。 主要技术 用来检验这一理论的是概率单位分析，这种方法允许 对各种因素在决定 参议员是否投票确认提名人的任命， 法庭 这项研究在几个方面改进了以前的调查。 它侧重于法院的一个重大变革时期，而不仅仅是 围绕某项提名的事件 它试图解释 参议员个人的投票，而不仅仅是参议院作为一个整体。 它 广泛撒网，不仅包括有争议的提名， 也是没有争议的。 它认真对待一个概念， 被提名人的意识形态和最高法院的资格可能被证明是 对参议员的确认投票有重大影响 在探索 这些因素作为投票决定因素发挥的作用，研究 制定衡量意识形态和资格的措施。 的 项目通过系统的内容分析来评估这些因素， 各大报纸对每位候选人的评论 该项目中测试的模型的理论- -“主要的-- 代理理论”-已证明在许多其他情况下是有用的。 然而，该理论以前没有被开发来探索如何 制度和政治环境实际上会影响 立法者的投票决定。 因此，理论本身应该是 通过这种新颖的扩展和应用而丰富。 这项研究， 因此，有着广泛的理论收益， 更好地了解确认的主要部分的动态 过程

Despite the importance of the Senate role in the confirmation of Supreme Court justices, knowledge of the factors affecting the votes of senators is sparse. This project attends to this deficiency by developing a theory of roll call voting that portrays senators as operating primarily in the interests of their consitutents. Senators, however, have their own personal preferences about the composition of the Supreme Court. In addition, presidents can bring rewards and punishments to bear on senators in attempting to influence their vote. Accordingly, senators must weigh the costs and benefits of 1) supporting the opposing constituent desires, 2) pursuing their own policy goals, and 3) supporting or opposing the president's nominee. To assess the weight senators put on the various actors seeking to influence their vote on confirmation, this project develops a testable model of how public opinion, the perceived ideology of the nominee, and the political circumstances surrounding the nomination came together to influence a senator's vote. Components of the model include the popularity and power of the president, the ideological preferences of both senators and their constituents, the ideology and qualifications of the nominee, and the importance of the open seat on the Court. The theory is tested on the 2,214 individual confirmation votes from Tom Clark (1949) through Anthony Kennedy (1988). The chief technique used to test the theory is probit analysis, an approach that permits the estimation of how important various factors are in determining whether or not a senator votes to confirm a nominee's appointment to the Court. The research improves on earlier investigations in several respects. It focuses on a significant period of change for the Court, not just on the events surrounding a particular nomination. It attempts to explain the votes of individual senators, not just the Senate as a whole. It casts its net widely to include not only controversial nominations but noncontroversial ones as well. It takes seriously the notion that a nominee's ideology and qualifications for the Court may prove to be major influences on a senator's confirmation vote. In exploring the role that these factors play as vote determinants, the research develops measures for perceived ideology and qualifications. The project assesses these factors through a systematic content analysis of major newspaper editorials on each nominee. The theory underlying the model tested in the project - - "principal- agency theory" - - has proved to be useful in numerous other contexts. The theory has not previously been developed, however, to explore how institutional and political circumstances actually work to affect a legislator's voting decision. Thus, the theory itself should be enriched by this novel extension and application. The research, therefore, has broad theoretical payoffs as well as helping us understand better the dynamics of a major part of the confirmation process.