Alexander Wuttke
Turnout and Electoral Supply
Electoral Turnout and Political Supply The causes and potential remedies of the decline of turn out rates in many western countries is subject to frequent discussions in the political sciences and in the wider public. Scholars from a rational-choice as well as from a social-psychological approach have long pointed to the role of the political supply in the individual calculus of voting. From this perspective, an individual´s decision about whether to turn out to vote is driven by short-term influences. Voters make up their mind scrutinizing the policy platforms of political parties at this specific election. Although the temporal dynamic over several elections is at the core of the theoretical argument, empirical investigations relied on cross-sectional data so far. Hence, this contribution employs the underutilized GLES Long-Term Panels and their two predecessors. It seeks to contribute to the ongoing public debate over the political parties´ leeway and responsibility to foster electoral turnout and to the ongoing scholarly debate about the voter´s capacity to observe and to process information about the changing context in making political decisions. Much research on electoral participation focused on institutional settings (Geys 2006) and stable individual traits (Smets & van Ham 2013). Recent studies on the turnout in German elections conclude that ‘nonvoters are voters and voters are nonvoters’ (Neu 2012:5; Güllner 2013), stressing that the decision whether to turn out to vote often changes intraindividually from election to election. Widening the perspective to include the effects of a changing political context concurs with a social-psychological literature on voting behavior that has long pointed to the influence of dynamic external stimuli on the motivation to participate in public affairs (e.g., Converse & Niemi 1971). Similarly, authors following the Rational Choice approach argued that the individual decision to participate in an election depends on the choice set a voter faces (e.g, Enelow & Hinich 1984). Expecting an influence of the political supply on the individual calculus of voting presupposes that, first, voters are able and motivated to recognize the policy stances of political parties and, secondly, are able and motivated to compare them to their own views. Acknowledging these cognitive requirements, the influence of policy distances on turnout intentions are presumed to be moderated by political sophistication. Furthermore the effect is hypothesized to be higher among independent voters who do not feel obligations toward any party. Considering these micro-psychological mechanisms, partisan dealignment and cognitive mobilization (Dalton 2012) should have strengthened the relationship between the political supply and turnout over the past years. Next to exerting a direct effect on electoral participation, the influence of a voter´s feeling of having meaningful choices in an election on this decision to turn out is also thought to be mediated by one´s satisfaction with democracy. Empirical studies proved the relationship between political supply and turnout (e.g., Lefkofridi, Giger & Gallego 2013; Plane & Gershtenson 2004; Wessels & Schmitt 2008) and citizen satisfaction with democracy (Ezrow & Xezonakis 2011), though separately and relying on cross-sectional data only. In order to minimize problems with unobserved heterogeneity and to avoid spurious relationships, I employ the underutilized GLES Long-Term Panels and their two predecessors. Policy distances will be calculated using the perceived party placements on the left-right-dimension and on several issue positions. On the level of the political supply, the proposed study contributes to the ongoing public debate over the political parties´ leeway and responsibility to foster electoral turnout. On the level of the individual, it contributes to the ongoing scholarly debate about the voter´s capacity to observe and to process information about the changing context in making political decisions.