Working Papers by Alexander V. Hirsch
# | Title | Authors | Date | Length | Paper | Abstract | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1458 | Voter Attention and Electoral Accountability | Devdariani, Saba Hirsch, Alexander V. | 08/01/2021 | 76 pages | sswp1458_2.pdf | What sorts of policy decisions do voters pay attention to, and why? And how does rational voter attention affect the behavior of politicians in office? We extend the Canes-Wrone, Herron and Shotts (2001) model of electoral agency to allow the voter to rationally choose when to "pay attention" to an incumbent's policy choice by expending costly effort to learn its consequences. In our model, the voter is sometimes motivated to pay costly attention to improve selection, but that attention influences accountability as a by-product. When attention is moderately costly, the voter generally pays more of it after the ex-ante unpopular policy than after the ex-ante popular one. Rational attention may improve accountability by decreasing the incumbent's rewards to choosing the ex-ante popular policy, increasing her rewards to choosing the ex-ante unpopular one, or both. However, it may also severely harm accountability, both by inducing a strong incumbent to "play it safe" by choosing a policy that avoids attention, or a weak incumbent to "gamble for resurrection" by choosing a policy that draws it. Finally, rational attention can induce or worsen pandering (that is, a bias toward the ex-ante popular policy) but never "fake leadership" (that is, a bias toward the ex-ante popular policy). The latter phenomenon thus requires an asymmetry in voter learning that derives from a process separate from costly information acquisition by the voter, and that is also sufficient to overcome its countervailing effects. | |
1455 | The Politics of Asymmetric Extremism | Hirsch, Alexander V. | 07/26/2019 | 52 | sswp_1455_s8ztgrf.pdf | In real-world policymaking, concrete and viable policy alternatives do not just appear out of thin air; they must be developed by someone with both the expertise and willingness to do so. We develop a model that explores the implications of strategic policy development by ideologically motivated actors, who craft competing high quality policies for a decisionmaker. We find that the process is characterized by unequal participation, inefficiently unpredictable and extreme outcomes, wasted effort, and an apparent bias toward extreme policies. When one proposer becomes asymmetrically extreme or capable they develop more extreme proposals, while their competitor moderates their proposals, increasingly declines to participate, and is harmed. Despite this, the decisionmaker benefits due to the increasing quality investments of the more extreme or capable proposer. The model thus provides rationale for why an ideologically extreme faction may come to dominate policymaking that is rooted in the nature of productive policy competition. | |
1454 | Lobbyists as Gatekeepers: Theory and Evidence | Hirsch, Alexander V. Kang, Karam Montagnes, B. Pablo You, Hye Young | 02/12/2021 | 55 | sswp_1454_x1Q4ZbI.pdf | Lobbyists are omnipresent in the policymaking process, but the value that they bring to both clients and politicians remains poorly understood. We develop a model in which a lobbyist's value derives from his ability to selectively screen which clients he brings to a politician, thereby earning the politician's trust and preferential treatment for his clients. Lobbyists face a dilemma, as their ability to screen also increases their value to special interests, and the prices they can charge. A lobbyist's profit motive undermines his ability to solve this dilemma, but an interest in policy outcomes—due either to a political ideology or a personal connection—enhances it, which paradoxically increases his profits. Using a unique dataset from reports mandated by the Foreign Agents Registration Act, we find that lobbyists become more selective when they are more ideologically aligned with politicians, consistent with our prediction. | |
1453 | A Theory of Policy Sabotage | Hirsch, Alexander V. Kastellec, Jonathan P. | 06/10/2019 | 50 | sswp_1453.pdf | We develop a theory of policy making that examines when policy sabotage—that is, the deliberate choice by an opposition party to interfere the implementation of a policy—can be an effective electoral strategy, even if rational voters can see that it is happening.In our model, a potential saboteur chooses whether to sabotage an incumbent's policy by blocking its successful implementation. Following this decision, a voter decides whether to retain the incumbent, who is of unknown quality, or to select a challenger.We find that the incentives for sabotage are broadly shaped by the underlying popularity of the incumbent—it is most attractive when an incumbent is somewhat unpopular.If so, sabotage may decrease the probability the incumbent is reelected, even though sabotage is observable to the voter. We illustrate our theory with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act since its passage in 2010. | |
1452 | Polarization and Campaign Spending in Elections | Hirsch, Alexander V. | 01/22/2019 | 27 | sswp_1452.pdf | We develop a Downsian model of electoral competition in which candidates with both policy and office-motivations use a mixture of platforms and campaign spending to gain the median voter's support. The unique equilibrium involves randomizing over both platforms and spending, and exhibits the following properties – (i) ex-ante uncertainty in platforms, spending, and the election winner, (ii) platform divergence, (iii) inefficiency in spending and outcomes, (iv) polarization, and (v) voter extremism. We also show that platform polarization and campaign spending move in tandem, since spending is used by candidates to gain support for extreme platforms. Factors that contribute to both phenomena include the candidates' desire for extreme platforms, and their ability to translate campaign spending into support for them. The latter insight generates new hypotheses about the potential causes of both rising polarization and spending. | |
1451 | Veto Players and Policy Development | Hirsch, Alexander V. Shotts, Kenneth W. | 11/12/2023 | 83 | sswp1451_revised-nov2023.pdf | We analyze the effects of veto players when the set of available policies isn't exogenously fixed, but rather is determined by policy developers who work to craft new high-quality proposals. If veto players are moderate then there is active competition between policy developers on both sides of the political spectrum. However, more extreme veto players induce asymmetric activity, as one side disengages from policy development. With highly-extreme veto players, policy development ceases and gridlock results. We also analyze effects on centrists' utility. Moderate veto players dampen productive policy development and extreme ones eliminate it entirely, either of which is bad for centrists. But some effects are surprisingly positive. In particular, somewhat-extreme veto players can induce policy developers who dislike the status quo to craft moderate, high-quality proposals. Our model accounts for changing patterns of policymaking in the U.S. Senate and predicts that if polarization continues centrists will become increasingly inclined to eliminate the filibuster. |