본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

미국의 선거인단제도와 부동주(swing state)

The Impact of Swing State on Presidential Election Outcome under the Electoral College System in the United States

한기영|안효종
중앙선거관리위원회 (NATIONAL ELECTION COMMISSION)|2017.12|선거연구 (The Study of Election)|제1권 제8호|pp. 255-278|DOI 10.23018/nec.2017.1.8.011

0

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

부동주스윙 현상선거인단제도Electoral collegeswing stateswing phenomenon

초록

기존 미국의 부동주(浮動州, swing state) 에 대한 연구는 주로 선거 캠페인이나 선거과정에서 나타나는 경합성 등에 초점이 맞추어져 분석되어 온 반면, 부동주의 지지정당 스윙(swing) 현상의 요인에 대한 연구는 찾아보기 힘들다. 특히 대선 기간 동안 대통령 후보들의 자금이나인력 등의 배치나 대통령 후보의 선거 캠페인 동선에 대한 연구와 선거인단 확보에 있어 가장치열하게 경합하고 있는 지역에 대한 분석 등을 위주로 진행되어왔다. 따라서 학자에 따라 부동주에 대한 정의 및 범위 설정에 있어 서로 각기 다른 기준들이 제시되어 왔다. 본 연구는 기존학자들의 연구를 바탕으로 총 9개의 부동주를 선택하여 부동주의 지지정당 스윙 현상을 경험적으로 분석하였다. 본 연구에서 부동주는 지난 7번의 대선 기간 동안 적어도 한 번 이상 지지정당을 바꾼 주를 대상으로, 이 중 두 정당 후보 간 지지율 격차가 5% 미만을 기록한 주를 부동주로정의하였다. 부동주의 지지정당 스윙 현상을 설명하기 위해 크게 제도적 요인과 유권자 요인으로 구분하여 분석하였다. 부동주의 지지정당 스윙 현상은 의회선거의 경합성과 대통령선거 시두 주요 후보 간 지지율 차이, 투표율, 실업률, 그리고 전체 유권자 대비 부동층 유권자의 비율등으로 설명이 가능한 것을 경험적으로 증명하였다.

Abstract

The previous studies of swing state in a presidential election have focused on campaign strategies or its competitiveness. However the reason why a few states have been flipped their supporting party back and forth historically. We analyze the factors that affect state swing phenomenon. This report demonstrates the process of making a few states flipping back and forth in a presidential election is complex. The institutional and voter factors on state swing proved to be equally effective in terms of explanatory power. Institutional factors was dominated by the competitiveness across the elections. Only gubernatorial election has not significant effect on state swing. The competitiveness of legislative and presidential election were the main factors of state swing. Among voter level factors, the ratio of independent voters within a certain state was strongly associated with the chance of state’s flipping on a presidential election. As voting studies indicate, partisanship has been centered on the discussion of presidential election determinant. The results are consistent with the previous presidential election studies, implying that the more independent voters a state have, the more likely to change the supporting party in a state among swing states.

참고문헌 (63)

  1. Abramowitz, Alan, "Why can’t we all just get along? The reality of a polarized America", The Forum, 3(2), pp.1~22 (2005)
  2. Abramowitz, Alan, "Is polarization a myth?", The Journal of Politics, 70(2), pp.542~555 (2008)
  3. Adams, Greg, "A Note on the Dynamics and Idiosyncrasies of Gubernatorial Popularity", State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 1, pp.380~393 (2001)
  4. Aldrich, J., "Rational choice and turnout", American Journal of Political Science, 37(1), pp.246~278 (1993)
  5. Baumgardner, James L., "The 1888 Presidential Election: How Corrupt?", Presidential Studies Quarterly, 14(3), pp.416~427 (1984)
  6. Benoit, William L., "Presidential campaigns and democracy", Mass Communication & Soci, 7(2), pp.177~190 (2004)
  7. Burden, Barry C., "Minor parties and strategic voting in recent US presidential elections", Electoral Studies, 24(4), pp.603~618 (2005)
  8. Campbell, Augus, "The American Voter" (1964), John Wiley & Sons
  9. "CNN exit poll" (2016)[URL]
  10. "The Cook political report" (2013)[URL]
  11. Cook, "State Political Culture and Public Opinion about Abortion", Political Research Quarterly, 67(46), pp.771~781 (1993)
  12. Damore, David, "Presidential Swing States: Why Only Ten Matter" (2015), Lexington Books
  13. Dhillon, A., "Economic theories of voter turnout", The Economic Journal, 112, pp.332~352 (2002)
  14. Dincer, "Political Culture and Corruption Issues in State Politics: A New Measure of Corruption Issues and a Test of Relationships to Political Culture", Publius, 47, pp.131~148 (2016)
  15. Elazar, Daniel J., "Are we a nation of cities?", The Public Interest, 4, pp.42~ (1966)
  16. Elazar, "American Federalism: A View from the States" (1984), Harper and Row
  17. Erikson, Robert S., "Statehouse Democracy:Public Opinion and Policy in the American States" (1993), Cambridge University Press
  18. Esser, Frank, "Comparing young voters’ political engage ment in the United States and Europe", American Behavioral Scientist, 50(9), pp.1195~1213 (2007)
  19. "Federal Election Commission Election Results"[URL]
  20. Ferguson, Margaret Robertson, "Chief Executive Success in the Legislative Arena", State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 3, pp.158~182 (2003)
  21. Fisher, "Definitely Not Moralistic: State Political Culture and Support for Donald Trump in the Race for the 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination", PS: Political Science & Politics, 49, pp.743~747 (2016)
  22. Frankovic, Kathleen A., "The Election of 1992: Reports and Interpretations" (2001), Chatham House
  23. Frendreis, "A Hundred Miles of Dry”: Religion and the Persistence of Prohibition in the U.S. States", State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 10, pp.302~319 (2010)
  24. Gelman, A., "Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do" (2009), Princeton University Press
  25. Geys, B., "Explaining voter turnout: A review of aggregate-level research", Electoral Studies, 25(4), pp.637~663 (2006)
  26. Gimpel, James, "Battleground States versus Blackout States: The Behavioral Implications of Modern Presidential Campaigns", The Journal of Politics, 69(3), pp.786~797 (2007)
  27. Glaeser, Edward L., "Myths and realities of American political geography", The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2), pp.119~144 (2006)
  28. Gomez, Brad T., "The Republicans should pray for rain: Weather, turnout, and voting in US presidential elections", Journal of Politics, 69(3), pp.649~663 (2007)
  29. Goux, Darshan, "The Battleground State: Conceptualizing Geographic Contestation in American Presidential Elections, 1960-2004", pp.2004
  30. Hansen, Susan B., "Governors’ Job Performance Ratings and Unemployment: The Case of California", State and Local Government Review, 31, pp.7~17 (1999)
  31. Hecht, Stacy Hunter, "Presidential Swing States: Why Only Ten Matter" (2015), Lexington Books
  32. Hill, David, "The electoral college, mobilization, and turnout in the 2000 presidential election", American Politics Research, 33(5), pp.700~725 (2005)
  33. Hillygus, D. Sunshine, "Moral issues and voter decision making in the 2004 presidential election", PS: Political Science and Politics, 38(2), pp.201~209 (2005)
  34. Hillygus, D. Sunshine, "The Persuadable Voter: Wedge Issues in Presidential Campaigns (2004)" (2008), Princeton University Press
  35. Holbrook, Thomas M., "Electoral competition in the American states", American Political Science Review, 87(04), pp.955~962 (1993)
  36. James, Scott C., "The political economy of voting rights enforcement in America’s Gilded Age: Electoral College competition, partisan commitment, and the federal election law", American Political Science Review, 93(01), pp.115~131 (1999)
  37. Johnson, Bonnie J., "Identities of Competitive States in US Presidential Elections:Electoral College Bias or Candidate-Centered Politics?", Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 35(2), pp.337~355 (2005)
  38. Killian, Linda, "The Swing Vote: The Untapped Power of Independents" (2012), Macmillan
  39. Kollman, Ken, "The American Political System" (2015), WW Norton & Company
  40. Larcinese, Valentino, "Allocating the US federal budget to the states: The impact of the president", Journal of Politics, 68(2), pp.447~456 (2006)
  41. Lewis-Beck, Michael S., "The American Voter Revisited" (2011), University of Michigan Press
  42. Lewis-Beck, Michael S., "Localism in presidential elections: The home state advantage", American Journal of Political Science, pp.548~556 (1983)
  43. Lieske, "The Changing Regional Subcultures of the American States and the Utility of a New Cultural Measure", Political Research Quarterly, 63, pp.538~552 (2010)
  44. Lindbeck, Assar, "Balanced-budget redistribution as the outcome of political competition", Public Choice, 52(3), pp.273~297 (1987)
  45. Lindbeck, Assar, "A model of political equilibrium in a representative democracy", Journal of Public Economics, 51(2), pp.195~209 (1993)
  46. Linzer, Drew A., "Dynamic Bayesian forecasting of presidential elections in the states", Journal of the American Statistical Association, 108(501), pp.124~134 (2013)
  47. Matsusaka, J. G., "Voter turnout: how much can we explain?", Public Choice, 98, pp.431~446 (1999)
  48. Mayer, William G., "The swing voter in American presidential elections", American Politics Research, 35(3), pp.358~388 (2007)
  49. Mayer, William G., "The Swing Voter in American Politics" (2008), Brookings Institution Press
  50. Mayhew, David R., "Congress: The Electoral Connection" (1974), Yale University Press
  51. McClurg, Scott D., "Living in a battleground: Presidential campaigns and fundamental predictors of vote choice", Political Research Quarterly, 62(3), pp.495~506 (2009)
  52. McLean, Scott L., "Presidential Swing States: Why Only Ten Matter" (2015), Lexington Books
  53. Middleton, Joel A., "Do community-based voter mobilization campaigns work even in battleground states? Evaluating the effectiveness of MoveOn’s 2004 Outreach Campaign", Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 3, pp.63~82 (2008)
  54. "NCSL"[URL]
  55. Panagopoulos, Costas, "Politicking online: The Transformation of Election Campaign Communications" (2009), Rutgers University Press
  56. Pomper, Gerald M., "The Election of 2000: Reports and Interpretations" (2000), Chatham House Pub
  57. Shaw, Daron R., "Swing voting and US presidential elections", The Swing Voter in American Politics, pp.75~101 (2008)
  58. "As Swing Districts Dwindle, Can a Divided House Stand?" (2012)[URL]
  59. Squire, Peverill, "Comparing gubernatorial and senatorial elections", Political Research Quarterly, 47(3), pp.705~720 (1994)
  61. "U.S. Election Atlas" (2016)[URL]
  62. "Introducing the 2017 Cook Political Report Partisan Voter Index" (2017)[URL]
  63. Wolak, Jennifer, "The consequences of presidential battleground strategies for citizen engagement", Political Research Quarterly, 59(3), pp.353~361 (2006)

관련 논문AI추천

미국 대선 예측 연구의 과거와 현재: 이론과 방법론신계균미래정치연구소 · 미래정치연구2012 · 제2권 제1호교외 지역 유권자들의 정당지지 변화와 2020년 미국 대통령선거: 경합주를 중심으로정진민한국세계지역학회 · 세계지역연구논총2021 · 제39권 제1호부동층과 이동 투표자의 특성과 투표 선택류재성미래정치연구소 · 미래정치연구2022 · 제12권 제1호Campaign Effects on the Level of State Competitiveness in U.S. Presidential Elections: The Cases of the 2008 and 2012 Elections성재윤, Paul-Henri Gurian미래정치연구소 · 미래정치연구2014 · 제4권 제1호Independent Voters in Political Contexts: A Comparative Study of the Presidential Elections in South Korea and the United States서정건, 정진민미국학연구소 · 미국학2016 · 제39권 제2호Party Contacting and Voter Turnout in the American Elections, 1960-2008류재성한국아메리카학회 · 미국학 논집2011 · 제43권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (14건)

제19대 대통령선거에서 나타난 유권자 기본 심리특성의 영향 : 가치와 정치이데올로기를 중심으로윤광일pp. 5-35제19대 대통령선거 TV토론의 설득전략 연구이수범, 김용준pp. 37-57정치참여와 소셜미디어 정보순환 효과: 2016년 촛불집회 참가자 현장설문조사를 중심으로장우영, 송경재pp. 59-80독일식 연동형 선거제도 도입의 쟁점과 과제: 초과의석 문제의 해법을 중심으로김종갑pp. 81-102국회의원 선거제도 개선방안: 지역주의 극복과 지방 대표성 강화를 중심으로박범종pp. 103-126
원문 보기