Happy voters

• Published in: Journal of public economics Vol. 146; pp. 41 - 57
• Main Authors: Liberini, Federica, Redoano, Michela, Proto, Eugenio
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier B.V 01.02.2017
• Subjects: Happiness; Retrospective voting; Subjective well-being; Subjective well-being; D6; Happiness; H1; Retrospective voting; D0; D1
• ISSN: 0047-2727; 1879-2316
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.11.013

Empirical models of retrospective voting primarily employ standard monetary and financial indicators to proxy for voters' utility and to explain voters' behavior. We show that subjective well-being explains variation in voting intention that goes beyond what is captured by these monetary and financial indicators. For example, individuals who are satisfied with their life are 1.6% more likely to support the incumbent; by contrast, a 10% increase in family income leads to a 0.18% increase in an individual's support of the incumbent. We use difference-in-differences analysis to identify how voter intention is affected by a negative shock to well-being: the death of a spouse. Individuals who experience the death of a spouse are around 10% less likely than those in the control group to support the incumbent. The results hold even if elected officials' policies (health care, social welfare) cannot reasonably be blamed for the death. •To our knowledge, it is the first paper to test the retrospective voting model by showing that subjective well-being explains variation in voting intention that goes beyond what is captured by traditional monetary and financial indicators.•Obvious concerns when exploring the relationship between voting and well-being are reverse causality and omitted variable bias. We address this concern in two different ways:•We analyze the responses of a sub-sample of ideologically neutral individuals (i.e. those who do not have a priori party bias) whose well-being should not be affected by the identity of the ruling party per se.•We use difference-in-differences analysis to identify how voter intention is affected by a negative shock to well-being: the death of a spouse.•This latter set-up not only provides a way to address concerns related to the identification of the effect running from SWB to voting, but also allows us to address voters’ rationality.