Elite perceptions of mass preferences in The Netherlands; biases in cognitive responsiveness

Abstract. Several studies have shown dissimilarities between political leaders and voters in terms of political attitudes and policy preferences. Though many explanations have been offered for this phenomenon, the knowledge factor has been overlooked. The basic question of this paper is how knowledgeable politicians are of the political opinions of their voters as well as of the general public. Forty-six national Dutch politicians were asked to estimate the percentage of the public at large and of their own voters who agree with specific political statements. These estimates were then compared with the actual distribution of opinions. Though using a rather strict criterion it has been found that politicians tend to give inaccurate estimates of the public's support for various political issues. The inaccuracy does not differ between members of the government and members of parliament, but politicians of parties in office appear to perform worse than members of opposition parties. The data do not support the hypothesis about politicians' ability to correctly estimate majority and minority opinions, or to accurately localize their own voters relative to the public at large. Furthermore it is observed that politicians overestimate rather than underestimate differences in opinion between the electorate and their own voters. No difference is found in politicians'estimates of political issues which can or cannot be classified in terms of 'left' or 'right'. In addition, politicians do not judge their voters to be more right-wing than they actually are. Contrary to our hypothesis, Social-Democratic politicians are not more likely to show a 'conservative bias' in estimating their voters' preferences compared to politicians from the Christian-Democratic and Liberal parties. Finally, the relevance of our findings for political sciences as well as some normative consequences are briefly discussed.     

Fragmented Welfare States: Federal Institutions and the Development of Social Policy

Despite political scientists' growing appreciation of the ways in which institutions influence political processes, the “new institutionalism” has so far had a limited impact on the comparative study of welfare state development. This article discusses some broad issues concerning institutions and public policy by exploring the implications of one set of institutions — those associated with federalism — for the politics of social policy. Federal institutions encourage three distinctive dynamics: they influence the policy preferences, strategies, and influence of social actors; they create important new institutional actors (the constituent units of the federation); and they generate predictable policymaking dilemmas associated with shared decision-making. Comparisons between social policy development in Canada and the United States are used to demonstrate that while federalism clearly matters, how it matters will depend on the characteristics of a particular federal system and the ways in which federal institutions interact with other important variables.     

The opinion-policy nexus in Europe and the role of political institutions

A strong link between citizen preferences and public policy is one of the key goals and criteria of democratic governance. Yet, our knowledge about the extent to which public policies on specific issues are in line with citizen preferences in Europe is limited. This article reports on the first study of the link between public opinion and public policy that covers a large and diverse sample of concrete public policy issues in 31 European democracies. The findings demonstrate a strong positive relationship and a substantial degree of congruence between public opinion and the state of public policy. Also examined is whether political institutions, including electoral systems and the horizontal and vertical division of powers, influence the opinion-policy link. The evidence for such effects is very limited, which suggests that the same institutions might affect policy representation in countervailing ways through different mechanisms.     

A Multilayered Jurisdictional Patchwork: Immigration Federalism in the United States

This article focuses on the immigration‐related demands currently being placed on local police in the United States and the emergence of what we call a “multilayered jurisdictional patchwork” (MJP) of immigration enforcement. We report results from nationwide surveys of city police chiefs and county sheriffs and intensive fieldwork in three jurisdictions. The enforcement landscape we describe is complicated by the varying and overlapping responsibilities of sheriffs and city police, and by the tendency for sheriffs to maintain closer relationships with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) authorities. We conclude by reflecting on the implications of the MJP—for immigrants, for their communities, and for the evolving relationship between levels of government in the federal system.     

The Balancing Act: Using Private Money for Public Projects

As public resources become scarcer, private donations for capital projects and public services may become increasingly important. Modern donors, using the new philanthropy philosophy common now in the nonprofit sector, may desire more control over the use of their funding than in the past. This research examines the effects of private donations on capital decision making, and explores the balancing act required by public officials between best practices and private norms in this process. The study uses the city of Omaha, Nebraska case, where corporate and individual donors have made significant financial contributions for the construction of a convention center/arena and a baseball stadium. Findings include both costs and benefits of this approach, and may be beneficial for theory‐building related to this relatively unexplored topic, as well as for practitioners faced with similar needs and demands.     

El Templete and Cuban Neoclassicism: A Multivalent Signifier as Site of Memory

In this article I explore the production and reception of El Templete, a nineteenth‐century memorial erected to commemorate the founding of Havana. This symbolically rich monument participates in the aesthetic traditions of architecture, sculpture and painting, and is a paradigmatic example of the multivalence of public, monumental art in the late colonial classicism of Latin America and the Caribbean. Rather than representing strictly an aesthetic discourse of Spanish colonial power, El Templete underwent a process of local assimilation, whereby classical forms and academic aesthetics were adapted to the self‐representation of a heterogeneous colonial city.     

LIFE SPAN OFFENDING TRAJECTORIES OF A DUTCH CONVICTION COHORT*

The aim of this paper is to describe the development of criminal behavior from early adolescence to late adulthood based on conviction data for a sample of Dutch offenders. Measuring over an age span of 12 to 72, we ask whether there is evidence for (1) criminal trajectories that are distinct in terms of time path, (2) a small group of persistent offenders, (3) criminal trajectories that are distinct in the mix of crimes committed, or, more specifically, persistent offenders disproportionately engaging in violent offences, and (4) different offender groups having different social profiles in life domains other than crime. The analysis is based on the conviction histories of the Dutch offenders in the Criminal Career and Life Course Study. Four trajectory groups were identified using a semi‐parametric, group‐based model: sporadic offenders, low‐rate desisters, moderate‐rate desisters and high‐rate persisters. Analyses show that high‐rate persisters engage in crime at a very substantial rate, even after age 50. Compared to other trajectory groups the high‐rate persistent trajectory group disproportionately engages in property crimes rather than violent crimes. Also, these distinct trajectories are found to be remarkably similar across age cohorts.