next up previous
Next: VAR CF0550 REP PARTY Up: No Title Previous: VAR CF0546 REP PARTY

VAR CF0549 DEM PARTY -DEFENSE SPENDING 7PT SCALE

VAR CF0549    DEM PARTY -DEFENSE SPENDING 7PT SCALE                           
              COLUMNS 417  - 417                                              
              NUMERIC                                                         
              MD EQ 0

        Some people believe that we should spend much less money for defense. 
        (1996: Suppose these people are at one end of a scale, at point 1.)   
        Others feel that defense spending should be greatly increased.        
        (1996:  Suppose these people are at the other end, at point 7.        
        And, of course, some other people have opinions somewhere in between  
        at points 2,3,4,5 or 6.)                                              
                                                                              
        Where would you place the Democratic Party on this scale?  (7-POINT   
        SCALE SHOWN TO R)                                                     
                                                                              
        DEMOCRATIC PARTY - R's RATING OF PARTY ON DEFENSE SPENDING SCALE      
        -------------------------------------------------------------------   
                                                                              
        USE WEIGHT VARIABLE VCF0009/VCF0009A/VCF0009B.                        
                                                                              
        In 1980-1984, 1990, Rs who responded "DK," NA or "haven't thought much
        about it" to self-placement on the 7-point defense spending scale were
        not asked for party placements on this scale and have been coded 0 in 
        VCF0549 and VCF0550.                                                  
                                                                              
        In 1986, 1988 and 1992, Rs were asked for party placements even if    
        their self-placements were "DK" or "haven't thought much about it" [in
        1986: or NA].  If R's self-placement was NA in 1988 and 1992, then R  
        was not asked for party placements and VCF0549,VCF0550 have been      
        coded 0.                                                              
                                                                              
        In 1996, the order in which this rating was administered for the 2    
        major parties was randomized.                                         
                                                                              
             1.  Greatly decrease defense spending                            
             2.                                                               
             3.                                                               
             4.                                                               
             5.                                                               
             6.                                                               
             7.  Greatly increase defense spending.                           
                                                                              
             0.  DK party placement; NA party placement; DK/ haven't thought  
                 much about self-placement (1980-1984,1990); NA self-placement
                 (exc. 1986); INAP, short form or Spanish language (1992);    
                 question not used                                            
                                                                              
        1980:  287    1982:  409     1984:  398                               
        1986:  412    1988:  316     1990:  443                               
        1992:  3711   1996:  960477                                           
                                                                              
                                                                              
==============================


Walter Mebane
Mon Nov 12 02:55:58 EST 2001