Voting Behaviour in Jamaica

By Paul Andrew Bourne (excerpt)

SUMMARY and CONCLUSION


Voting behaviour is not only about political preference, and while people who are ?'undying' supporters for a party may continue to voting one way (or decides not to vote); the vast majority of the voting populace are more sympathizers as against being fanatics. With this said, voting behaviour is never stationary but it is fluid as water and dynamic as the social actions of man. Generally, people vote base on (i) charismatic leadership; (ii) socialization - earlier traditions; (iii) perception of direct benefits (or disbenefits); (iv) associates and class affiliation; (v) gender differences, and that there is a shift-taking place in Jamaican landscape. Increasingly more Jamaicans are becoming meticulous and are moving away from the stereotypical uncritical and less responsive to chicanery. Education through the formal institutions and media are playing a pivotal function in fostering a critical mind in the public.

Several important shifts can be seen to have taken place in voter attitudes over the past ten months, if one compares the August 2006 and the May 2007 CLG survey results. When asked who they would "vote for in the next general elections", the current (May 2007) survey indicates that PNP still retains a 3 percent lead (36.2% PNP to 33.2% JLP) among eligible voters. However, a substantial narrowing has occurred since August 2006, when the comparable figures were 53% PNP and 23.1% JLP. This represents a 10% net increase for JLP, and a 17% decrease for PNP.

There has also been a shift in ?'overall party support' during that same period. Again, PNP remains slightly ahead, but has lost ground in the intervening months. When asked what party they "always vote for" or "usually vote for", 43% of the respondents to the May 2007 survey say they "usually" or "always" vote for PNP, whereas 36.3% "usually" or "always" vote for JLP. As of the August 2006 survey, the comparable figures were 57.2% PNP supporters and 25.2% JLP supporters -- an 11% increase for JLP and 14% drop for PNP over a ten-month period.

Clearly, there is a class dimension to the voting preferences, and this extends to Jamaicans' party and candidate preferences as well. With respect to ?'party identification' ("which do you consider yourself to be?"), PNP again has a slight advantage among the lower (43.2% PNP, 39.6% JLP) and middle (38.6% PNP, 35.6% JLP) classes. However, in the "upper-middle and upper class" category, JLP has the edge in party identification. (40.3% PNP, 43.5% JLP)

Within the lower class, marginally more people believe that Simpson-Miller (38.6%) "would do a better job of running the country" compared to Golding (36.2%). However more people within the middle class reported that Golding (37.4%) would do a better job of running the country than Simpson-Miller (31.9%). Upper-middle and upper class respondents, on the other hand, give Mrs. Simpson-Miller the nod over Mr. Golding (40.3%, 33.8% respectively).
In the May 2007 survey, 41% of the males identified with PNP and 42% with JLP, whereas for females 42% identified with PNP and only about 35% with JLP--a substantal gender difference in party preference. Women also are less satisfied with the two-party system generally, with 22% opting for "something else", as compared with 17% among males.

The May survey also indicates about a 3 percent difference in anticipated voting patterns. Of those who indicated a choice of either PNP or JLP in the coming election, the males were about evenly split at 50.6% JLP / 49.4% PNP. However, among women, 53.5% said they would vote for PNP and 46.5% for JLP -- a 7-point difference.

Women also appear to be less satisfied with the performance of their existing MPs. When asked ?'How satisfied are you that the MP from this constituency listens to the problems of the people?', 12% of the May 2007 sample said they were ?'satisfied', 54% said ?'sometimes' and 35% indicated ?'dissatisfied'. Of those who reported being ?'satisfied', 51.0% were males and 49.0% were females. However of the ?'dissatisfied', 46% were males with 54% being females.

Among those who are middle-aged (26-60 years), the difference between those who favour the PNP and favour the JLP shrinks to only 1% (at 42.2% and 41.4% respectively). The elderly (over 60), on the other hand, are substantially PNP sympathizers. Approximately 50% reported a PNP preference compared to 34% for the JLP, which represents a 16% difference -- a significant preference for the PNP when compared to the other age groups.

In terms of how they intend to vote in the coming election, among ?'youth' 30.8% say they will vote for PNP, 26% for JLP, and 34.7% say they will not be voting. The figures are much closer for middle-aged adults, with 38.7% saying they will vote for PNP and 36.3% for JLP. Among the elderly, there is a ten-point spread, with 48% for PNP and 38% for JLP. Levels of nonvoting are highest among youth, with 34.7% saying they "will not vote", compared to 19.8% among middle-aged adults, and 10% among the elderly. These figures are generally in accord with voting studies in many other societies that have consistently shown that as adults' age and become more engaged in the social order; they tend to vote at higher levels.

There is a positive statistical relationship between future voting behaviour of those who are enumerated and past voting behaviour (cc=58.9%, X2 (16) = 303.6, p value = 0.01< 0.05). The findings reveal that 75.5% of those who were ?'Definite' JLP support will retain this position in the upcoming elections compared to 68.2% for the PNP. Continuing, of ?'Definite' voters, 11.3% of the JLP supporters reported that they ?'probably' will vote for their party compared to 15.9% of the PNPs.

A paradigm shift in terms of political orientation seems to be taking place as 5.3% of ?'Definite' supporters of the PNP reported that they would definitely be voting for the JLP compared to 4.7% of the ?'Definite' JLP who indicated that they would definitely be marking an X for the PNP. Further, 1.5% of ?'Definite' PNP indicated a possibility of voting for the JLP compared to 2.8% of ?'die-hearted' JLP supporters who mentioned that they probably might be marking that X for the PNP. Furthermore, 3.4% of those who have a political leniency toward the JLP reported that they will definitely be voting for the PNP with 4.3% mentioned ?'probably'. However, among those with the PNP orientation, 18.9% of those who voted PNP in the last general elections reported that they will be voting for the JLP, with another 16.5% who said that they might be marking that X for the JLP.
Those whose political culture is not party based, but whose perspective is shaped possibly on issues, 21.3% indicated that they might vote for the PNP compared to 15.7% for the JLP. Of this same group of voters, 25% reported a definitely preference for the PNP with the JLP receiving the same percentage.
The dissatisfaction and/or discontent with the political system is higher for those with a PNP orientation as against with a JLP belief. As, 9% of ?'Definite' PNP voters reported that they will not be vote in the upcoming elections compared to 5.7% for JLP. Political culture is not static and so, of those who expressed a leniency toward a party, the dissatisfaction is higher, again, for the PNP as 15% reported that they will definitely not be voting in the upcoming general elections compared to 10% for the JLP.

CONCLUSION

The current survey (May 2007) indicates that PNP still retains a 3 percent lead (36.2% PNP to 33.2% JLP) among eligible voters. However, a substantial narrowing has occurred since August 2006, when the comparable figures were 53% PNP and 23.1% JLP. This represents a 10% net increase for JLP, and a 17% decrease for PNP. Approximately 67% of the respondents to the May 2007 survey perceived themselves to be in the "working class" (i.e. the lower class), 27% in the "middle class", 4% within the "upper-middle" class, and 2% "upper class". Although the survey shows PNP with a slight advantage in the vote across all of the social classes, that advantage tends to be weakest and most vulnerable among the lower class (36.7% PNP, 34.7% JLP), who make up approximately two-thirds of voting age adults. The PNP's advantage is somewhat stronger among middle class voters (35.6% PNP, 31.2% JLP), and is strongest among the ?'upper-middle' and ?'upper' class voters (44.3% PNP, 31.1% JLP). Furthermore, from the May 2007 survey, 41% of the males identified with PNP and 42% with JLP, whereas for females 42% identified with PNP and only about 35% with JLP--a substantial gender difference in party preference. Women also are less satisfied with the two-party system generally, with 22% opting for "something else", as compared with 17% among males. The May survey also indicates about a 3 percent difference in anticipated voting patterns. Of those who indicated a choice of either PNP or JLP in the coming election, the males were about evenly split at 50.6% JLP / 49.4% PNP. However, among women, 53.5% said they would vote for PNP and 46.5% for JLP -- a 7-point difference. Women also appear to be less satisfied with the performance of their existing MPs. When asked ?'How satisfied are you that the MP from this constituency listens to the problems of the people?', 12% of the May 2007 sample said they were ?'satisfied', 54% said ?'sometimes' and 35% indicated ?'dissatisfied'.

References
Branton, Regina P. (2004). Voting in initiative elections: Does the context of racial and ethnic diversity matter? State Politics and Policy Quarterly. 4(3): 294-317.
British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). (2007). Voting behaviour. http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/education/bitesize/higher/modern/uk_gov_politics/elect_vote2_rev.shtml (accessed June 12 2007).
Chevannes, Barry. (2001). Learning to be a man: Culture, socialization and gender identity in five Caribbean communities. Kingston, Jamaica: Univer. of the West Indies Press.
Chressanthis, George A., Kathie S. Gilbert, and Paul W. Grimes. (1991). Ideology, constituent interests, and senatorial voting: The case of abortion. Social Science Quarterly. 72(3), 588-600.
Edie, Carlene J. 1997. Retrospective in commemoration of Carl Stone: Jamaican pioneer of political culture. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs.

Figueroa, Mark. Old (Female) glass ceiling and new (male) looking glasses. 2004. In Gender in the 21st century: Caribbean Perspective, visions and possibilities, edited Barbara Bailey and Elsa Leo-Rhynie. Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle.

Griffin, Leonna D. (2004). US foreign aid and its effects on UN General Assembly voting on important votes. Louisiana State University and Agriculture and Mechnical College, dissertation (thesis), M.A.

Historylearningsite.ca.uk. (2007). Voting behaviour in America. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/voting_behaviour_in_america.htm (accessed 12 June 2007).
Jamieson, A., Shin, H. B, and Day, J. (2002). Voting and Registration in the Election of November 2000: Population Characteristics. U. S. Census Bureau Report.
Johnson, Martin, Robert M. Stein, and Robert Winkle. (2003). Language choice, residential stability, and voting among Latino Americans. Social Science Quarterly. 84
Kaufmann, Karen M. (2002). Culture wars, secular realignment, and the gender gap in party identification. Political Behavior. 24(3): 283-307.
Lipset, S. and S. Rokkan (1967) Party Systems and Voter Alignments-Cross National Perspectives. New York: Free Press.
Mischel, J. 1966. A social learning view of sex difference in behavior. In the Development of Sex difference edited by E. E. Maccoby. Los Angeles: Stanford Univer. Press.
Munroe, Trevor. (1970) Political Change and Constitutional Development in Jamaica. Kingston: University of the West Indies, ISER.
Powell, Lawrence A., Paul Bourne, and Lloyd Waller. (2007). Probing Jamaica's political culture, volume1: Main Trends in the July-August 2006 Leadership and Governance Survey. Kingston, Jamaica: Centre for Leadership and Governance.
Rae, D. (1967) The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Saalfeld, T. 2004. Party identification and the social bases of voting behaviour in the 2002 Bundestag election. German Politics 13(2):170-200.
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. (2002). Gender stereotypes and vote choice. American Journal of Political Science. 46(1): 20-34.
Stone, Carl. (1992). Patterns and trends in voting in Jamaica, 19550s to 1980s.
______. (1981). Public opinion and the 1980s elections in Jamaica. Caribbean Quarterly 27(2): 1-19.
______. (1989). Pollstering: "Perspective" interview. Caribbean Perspective 44/45:9
______. (1978a) "Class and status voting in Jamaica." Social and Economic Studies 26: 279-293.
______. (1978b) "Regional party voting in Jamaica (1959 - 1976). Journal of Interamerican Studies and world affairs 220:393-420.
_____(1977) "Class and the institutionalization of two-party politics in Jamaica." Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Studies 14: 177-196.
______(1974) Electoral Behaviour and Public Opinion in Jamaica. Kingston: University
of the West Indies, ISER.
______(1973) Class, Race and Political Behaviour in Urban Jamaica. Kingston: University of the West Indies, ISER.

Vassell, Linette. 2000. Power, governance and the structure of opportunity for women in decision making in Jamaica. The construction of gender development indicators for Jamaica. Kingston, Jamaica: PIOJ/UNDP/CIDA Kingston.