Splitsville: A Study of Income Inequality and Political Polarization in the United States House of Representatives

The study compares a measure of income inequality with polarization scores of U.S. Representatives from the 104th to the 109th Congresses. It attempts to explain the link, on the abstract level, between high inequality and high polarization. The end findings indicate that inequality increases a Representative's likelihood to act liberally.

The Moderating Role of Electoral Pressure on Congressional Ideological Polarization: A Cross-Sectional Time-Series Analysis

Reelection and self-interest are recurring themes in the study of our congressional leaders. To date, many studies have already been done on the trends between elections, party affiliation, and voting behavior in Congress. However, because a plethora of data has been collected on both elections and congressional voting, the ability to draw a connection between the two provides a very reasonable prospect. This project analyzes whether voting shifts in congressional elections have an effect on congressional voting. Will a congressman become ideologically more polarized when his electoral margins increase? Essentially, this paper assumes that all congressmen are ideologically polarized, and it is elections which serve to reel congressmen back toward the ideological middle. The election and ideological data for this study, which spans from the 56th to the 107th Congress, finds statistically significant relationships between these two variables. In fact, congressman pay attention to election returns when voting in Congress. When broken down by party, Democrats are more exhibitive of this phenomenon, which suggest that Democrats may be more likely to intrinsically follow the popular model of representation. Meanwhile, it can be hypothesized that insignificant results for Republicans indicate that Republicans may follow a trustee model of representation.

Total Factor Productivity, Human Capital and Outward Orientation: Differences by Stage of Ddevelopment and Geographic Regions

Do openness and human capital accumulation promote economic growth? While intuition argues yes, the existing empirical evidence provides mixed support for such assertions. We examine Cobb-Douglas production function specifications for a 30-year panel of 83 countries representing all regions of the world and all income groups. We estimate and compare labor and capital elasticities of output per worker across each of several income and geographic groups, finding significant differences in production technology. Then we estimate the total factor productivity series for each classification. Using determinants of total factor productivity that include, among many others, human capital, openness, and distortion of domestic prices relative to world prices, we find significant differences in results between the overall sample and sub-samples of countries. In particular, a policy of outward orientation may or may not promote growth in specific country groups. even if geared to reducing price distortion and increasing openness. Human capital plays a smaller role in enhancing growth through total factor productivity.

The Effects of Trade Orientation and Human Capital on Total Factor Productivity

We study the effects of trade orientation and human capital on total factor productivity for a pooled cross-section, time-series sample of developed and developing countries. We first estimate total factor productivity from a parsimonious specification of the aggregate production function involving output per worker, capital per worker, and the labor force, both with and without the stock of human capital. Then we consider a number of potential determinants of total factor productivity growth including several measures of trade orientation as well as a measure of human capital. We find that a high degree of openness benefits total factor productivity and that human capital contributes to total factor productivity only after our measure of openness passes some threshold level. Before that threshold, increases in human capital actually depress total factor productivity. Finally, we also consider the issue of convergence of real GDP per worker and total factor productivity, finding more evidence of convergence for the latter than for the former.