Proxy voting in the U.S. House of Representatives: Legislative shirking in new clothing?
Open access copy at publisher website
Description
New technological developments have heightened interest in understanding and evaluating new tools of participatory and representative engagement in the political sphere. Recent academic research in this area is mainly theoretical, and focuses on voters rather than legislators. This study addresses this gap in the literature by empirically exploring the unique case of proxy voting by members of the U.S. House of Representatives that was introduced as an emergency measure to allow the Congress to function during COVID-19. The core result from this study, given its finding that vote skipping during 2019 is positively correlated with the use of proxy voting during 2021, indicates that proxy voting in this case is connected to legislative shirking. Thus, it appears that the proxy voting mechanism introduced in 2020 via a U.S. House resolution represents a new configuration of traditional legislative shirking or vote skipping.
Impact and interest:
Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
| ID Code: | 240735 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Item Type: | Contribution to Journal (Journal Article) | ||
| Refereed: | Yes | ||
| ORCID iD: |
|
||
| Measurements or Duration: | 11 pages | ||
| Keywords: | legislative shirking, negative binomial regression, proxy voting, representative democracy, vote skipping | ||
| DOI: | 10.3389/fams.2023.1150016 | ||
| ISSN: | 2297-4687 | ||
| Pure ID: | 137841281 | ||
| Divisions: | Current > Research Centres > Centre for Behavioural Economics, Society & Technology Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Business & Law Current > Schools > School of Economics & Finance |
||
| Funding Information: | HR 965 was supported by 207 Democrats, and opposed by 14 Democrats, 184 Republicans, and one Independent. The 24 non-voting Representatives were evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. See www.clerk.house.gov . 2 | ||
| Copyright Owner: | 2023 The Authors | ||
| Copyright Statement: | This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under a Creative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use and that permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the document is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then refer to the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe that this work infringes copyright please provide details by email to qut.copyright@qut.edu.au | ||
| Deposited On: | 21 Jun 2023 23:21 | ||
| Last Modified: | 22 Jun 2024 19:55 |
Export: EndNote | Dublin Core | BibTeX
Repository Staff Only: item control page
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)