Author's Keywords: House of Commons, 2005 British General Election, MPs	Convention All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41497_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Cowley, Philip. "Being Policed? Or Just Pleasing Themselves? The Case of MPs in the 2005 UK Geneal Election" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2011-03-14 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41497_index.html>

Cowley, P. , 2005-09-01 "Being Policed? Or Just Pleasing Themselves? The Case of MPs in the 2005 UK Geneal Election" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2011-03-14 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41497_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: British General Elections have traditionally been seen as national-level events, in which local factors play but a marginal role. That view has been under attack in recent years, with a growing body of work pointing out evidence of local variations in electoral performance. Almost none of this research, however, has looked at the role that MPs' legislative behaviour has on their performance - and in particular the link between their voting in the House of Commons and their performance at the subsequent election. This paper examines the 2005 British General Election, at which the conditions for legislative behaviour to influence electoral outcomes were better than they have been since the beginnings of the modern British party system. It finds that very few of the issues to occasion rebellion in the House of Commons had any effect on the fortunes of MPs. Both rebels and loyalists performed roughly equally at the polls, with no statistically significant difference between them. The only substantive exception to this is the subject of university top-up fees – where rebels do appear to have performed marginally better at the polls than those who did not defy the whips. This, however, was worth less than one percentage point – and probably helped determine the outcome in just six constituencies. For the most part, British voters still make their judgment about the government as a whole – not about the behaviour of individual MPs.

Who Might Govern Determines who You Vote for: Pre-Electoral Identifiability of Coalitions and Strategic Voting

Are Naturalized Citizens Leading Latinos to Electoral Empowerment? Voting Among Naturalized Latinos Registered to Vote in the 2000 Election