ChangeWe Can Believe In? Using Political Science to Predict Policy Change in the Obama Presidency

Based on the results of the 2008 presidential and congressional elections, an analysis using theories and methods of modern political science (pivotal politics theory, ideal point estimates, and bootstrap simulations) suggests that the conditions are ripe for real policy change. Specifically, we should expect policies to move significantly in a liberal direction, few or no policies should move in a conservative direction, and many of the outcomes will bemoderate or somewhat to the left of center (rather than far left). Furthermore, the predictions depend as much on partisan polarization and the results of the congressional election as they do on the outcome of presidential election itself. “We can choose hope over fear, unity over division, the promise of change over the power of the status quo.” —Barack Obama, Canton, Ohio, October 27, 2008 It is unfortunately all too common for presidents to fail to deliver on their campaign promises, ultimately disappointing both supporters and the general public alike— occasionally to the point of electoral retribution. George H.W. Bush couldn’t deliver on his promise to hold the line on taxes even thoughhe pledged: “readmy lips: no new taxes.” He was replaced by Bill Clinton, whose first term was marked by a visible failure to reform health care. Eight years after GeorgeW. Bush derided “nation building” in a presidential debate, we have the quagmire that is Iraq. Upon re-election, Bush also claimed to have earned “political capital” that he intended to spend reforming Social Security, but his proposals went nowhere fast. Why should we think that the election of Barack Obama, as historic as it is, should be any different? President Obama inherits a number of substantial policy challenges, including a financial and economic crisis, a hugely unpopular war, popular demand for health care reform, and the ongoing need to protect the country against terrorism. Expectations are so high that any failure to deliver on his promises could be especially devastating to his own future electoral prospects, the reputation of the Democratic Party, and to the realization of long-term policy change. An analysis based on the theories and methods of modern political science suggests that the conditions are ripe for real policy change, that we should expect policies to move significantly in a liberal direction, and that many of the outcomes will be moderate or somewhat to the left of center (rather than far left). The optimism of Obama’s supporters is therefore not simply the wishful thinking that it otherwise would be after a typical election. Ironically, such optimistic expectations are realistic precisely because of the cold, hard reality of a policymaking process characterized by “politics as usual.” Moreover, the results of the analysis depend as much on the results of congressional elections—especially Senate elections—as they do on the outcome of the presidential contest because neither electoral outcome would have been individually sufficient to produce a significant change. PIVOTAL POLITICSTHEORY, IDEAL POINT ESTIMATES, AND BOOTSTRAPPING In order tomake systematic predictions about the future, we need a theory of how the political world works and data about the relevant conditions.The theory that wewill use here is known as the “pivotal politics” theory, developed by Keith Krehbiel (1998) and David Brady and Craig Volden (1997). The central premise of the theory is that the American legislative process is intentionally designed to make changes in policy difficult. In other words, a strong bias is built into American democratic institutions that JonathanWoon is assistant professor of political science at the University of Pittsburgh. His Ph.D. is from Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business, and his research interests include congressional policymaking, political parties, and formal theory. He can be reached at [email protected]. .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................