Does Military Service Help Candidates for Office?
Jeremy Teigen does a guest post at the Monkey Cage examining the impact of past military service on electoral success in House races from 2000-2006:
In general, veteran status has small effects that are not statistically distinguishable from 0. Democratic vets did better than their nonveteran peers in 2002, but did no better in 2006. That election was the year that Joe Sestak, Tammy Duckworth, and others constituted the “Fighting Dems,” a year when you would expect Democratic vets to do well, but instead Republican veterans were helped by a martial past. While the Fighting Dems may have helped the Democratic tide in 2006 by helping Democrats credibly criticize the Bush administration’s conduct of OIF (and OEF), Democratic veterans actually did a little bit worse than Democrats without a service record. This result may have occurred because Democrats were overzealous in their attempts to attract veterans as candidates, leading them to select veterans over higher quality challengers (14% of Democratic challengers were vets in 2002, compared to 28% in 2006). Republican vets running that year performed a little better than nonveteran Republican candidates, as they had been doing in the previous three elections, but the advantage just slipped above statistical significance. Overall, the effect of veteran status is very small.
Basically, there’s no convincing evidence that recruiting veterans is a good strategy, but it’s close enough that people who intuitively feel it’s a good strategy will be able to keep feeling that way.
It does seem to me, though, that as a governance matter it’s useful to have veterans in the congress. In general, congressional oversight of national security issues has tended to be lackluster. To improve things I think it’s important to have members of congress who feel personally comfortable discussing all aspects of this stuff. That means veterans. But it also means people with Foreign Service backgrounds and people with intelligence backgrounds and all the rest.
28 Responses to “Does Military Service Help Candidates for Office?”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 18th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Bloomberg says we will now all be ruled by a murky cabal at something called Center for American Progress –so the issue of who wins election to the Senate is a moot as it was in Caligula’s day.
See http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aF7fB1PF0NPg
“Nov. 18 (Bloomberg) — Three blocks from the White House, on the 10th floor of a sleek glass building, young workers pound at computers, with giant flat-screen TVs overhead. It has the look and feel of a high-tech startup.
In many ways it is. The product is ideas. ”
———-
ha ha ha. Fooled me.
November 18th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Speaking of Caligula, Matthew, could you have that pony you’ve been promising us made into a Senator? Have him represent Mississippi — so long as you keep him facing away from the voters at rallies, no one will notice that Trent Lott is even gone.
November 18th, 2008 at 11:57 am
It depends, doesn’t it, on whether veterans are listened to, or simply used as props for patriotic display. Jim Webb, a Vietnam-era Marine and Reagan administration Navy Secretary turned freshman senator, shepherded a major upgrade of the GI Bill through Congress. But is there any evidence that Joe Sestak, a recently retired Navy admiral turned freshman congressman, has significantly influenced House Democrats’ military policy planning?
November 18th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I live in Sestak’s district, and the fact that he was an admiral gave him instant credibility in 2006. There were a lot of factors in play during that election, not the least of which there was a leak that his opponent (Curt Weldon) was under FBI investigation. But in this specific case the military service factor was important.
November 18th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Re allbetsareoff’s comment “But is there any evidence that Joe Sestak, a recently retired Navy admiral turned freshman congressman, has significantly influenced House Democrats’ military policy planning?”
———
Sestak replaced Republican Curt Weldon , who was Vice Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Probably the Biggest employer in Sestak’s district is Boeing. What do you think?
Weldon, for those who follow the fine art of political assassinations, is a fascinating case. Had been an incumbant for a long time and had won by large majorities. Yet lost in 2006 when the FBI raided the offices of his daughter and a close political patron. Word was that Curt was playing footsie with some unsavory Serbs.
Yet, two years later –NOTHING. Curt walking around free as a bird — I believe he’s now a lobbyist.
Which raises the interesting question: Why did Bush/Cheney let a major Republican Congressman with a solid hold in his district be destroyed in this manner?
Do get me wrong — if someone shoved ole Curt in front of a bus, I wouldn’t cry. But it is a very interesting mystery.
November 18th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
PS Forgot to mention — FBI raided the offices of Curt Weldon’s associates TWO Weeks before the election — perfect timing. Long enough for the news to get out to the voters –but not enough time for Curt to make any kind of a counter response.
A friend of my had already scheduled a fundraiser for Curt for the evening of the day on which the raid occurred. Senator Arlen Spector was keynote speaker.
Hee hee. I would have loved to have been there.
November 18th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Not in presidential races. Clinton (accused draft dodger) beat 2 decorated WWII veterans(George HW Bush and Bob Dole). Bush (AWOL from National Guard during Vietnam) beat 2 Vietnam vets (McCain in the 2000 GOP primary, then Kerry in the 2004 election). Obama (never served) beat POW McCain this year.
1992, 1996 and 2000 were peacetime elections, but candidates with little or no military service (Bush and Obama) defeated veterans in elections held during wartime.
November 18th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
If the veteran candidates were running in districts that were redder than the non-veteran candidates, but performed equally well, that is strong evidence that their veteran status did help.
November 18th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Matt,
There’s an important methodological point to keep in mind here. If the Democrats currently believe that candidates with military service perform better, all else being equal, than candidates without, they will recruit some candidates with military experience who are actually worse on the whole on all other features than available would-be candidates without military service. So, the actual performance of candidates with military service would be expected to be the same as that of candidates without.
It’s a lot like how 7 footers don’t necessarily play better on average in the NBA than 6′10″ guys. The NBA will draft dorkier 7 footers than shorter guys, so the 7 footers don’t necessarily perform better on average than the non-7 footers, there are just a higher percentage of the world’s population of 7-footers in the NBA than of non-7-footers.
November 18th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
To ricochet off Steve’s NBA analogy, I would bet being a former sports star has a bigger impact than military service.
November 18th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
I think it depends on the individual. I respect those who serve in the military but just serving does not necessarily make one more capable or knowledge
November 21st, 2008 at 5:45 am
i wondered if the swiftboat attacks against kerry in o4 had a residual effect that ended up inadvertently tainting mccain in o8. didn’t the swiftboat attacks train people to discount military service?
January 20th, 2009 at 2:40 am
laptop battery
laptop batteries
January 26th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Very good place
==
http://webuyuglyhousesnow.info/carpeting-101/
February 3rd, 2009 at 4:40 pm
You are the greatest!
==
http://webuyuglyhousesnow.info/phenomena-of-international-real-estate/
March 11th, 2009 at 4:23 am
Incredible site!
March 14th, 2009 at 5:04 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
xanax
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:00 am
tramadol
Incredible site!
March 23rd, 2009 at 12:09 am
bookmark it
March 23rd, 2009 at 12:10 am
hello
just thanks
March 25th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Fantastic work!
==
http://ipod-touch.web-elite.com/site.map.php
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:03 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:03 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 8th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
After reading through the article, I feel that I really need more info. Can you suggest some resources please?
April 9th, 2009 at 1:02 am
FANTASTIC!
April 9th, 2009 at 5:07 am
Excellent site, It was pleasant to me. viagra
April 15th, 2009 at 6:10 am
Not that I’m totally impressed, but this is a lot more than I expected for when I found a link on Delicious telling that the info is quite decent. Thanks.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:27 am
I’ll share it on Twitter.