Testing issue accountability among public meeting commenters

• Department of Political and Social Sciences

This session of the Political Behaviour Colloquium features a presentation by Alexander Sahn (Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of North Carolina and Research Associate at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies).

Standard theories of accountability suggest politicians respond to voter preferences for fear of electoral sanction, but most voters are ill-informed about policy. One answer to this paradox is that a small group of engaged citizens is sufficient to drive responsiveness. We test this claim by tracking over 7,000 public commenters in San Francisco land use meetings—observing their expressed preferences, surveying them later, and linking to administrative data. We show that over three-quarters of commenters successfully recall their past positions expressed on issues up to five years later, but less than half learn the subsequent policy action that was taken. Those who recall their views aligning with the policy action are four times more likely to report that their comment was listened to and resulted in a change in policy. But this does not spill over into generalised efficacy, trust, perceptions of responsiveness, or evaluations of candidates, nor the behavioral outcomes of voting or contributing to campaigns. Even the most engaged citizens do not apparently punish public officials for enacting policies out of step with their views.

The Zoom link will be sent upon registration.