ABSTRACT

More than 300 Members of Parliament (MPs) found themselves in an awkward position after the vote on Britain’s membership in the EU: They had taken a public stance on Brexit in opposition to their constituents. We investigate whether MPs attempted to bolster their personal vote in response and if this provided electoral protection. Using Early Day Motions (EDMs), we find that MPs supporting Leave in Remain constituencies sponsored more EDMs after Brexit but were also more likely to lose re-election in 2017. Remain supporting MPs in Leave constituencies switched their position on Brexit when voting to trigger Article 50, but did not sponsor more EDMs post-Brexit and did not lose disproportionately compared to Brexit-aligned MPs. We conclude by considering whether the value of the personal vote and incumbency may have declined as affective polarization (Mason, 2018 Mason, L. (2018). Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. The University of Chicago Press.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar]) among the British electorate may be on the rise during the era of Brexit.

摘要

超过 300 名国会议员 (MPs) 在对英国的欧盟成员资格进行投票后发现自己处于尴尬的境地：他们对英国脱欧采取了公开立场，反对他们的选民。我们调查国会议员是否试图加强他们的个人投票作为回应，以及这是否提供了选举保护。使用早期动议 (EDM)，我们发现支持留欧选区的国会议员在英国退欧后赞助了更多 EDM，但在 2017 年也更有可能失去连任。第 50 条，但在英国脱欧后没有赞助更多的 EDM，并且与英国脱欧一致的国会议员相比并没有不成比例地失去。2018年 梅森，L.（2018 年）。不文明协议：政治如何成为我们的身份。芝加哥大学出版社。[Crossref]  , [Google Scholar] ) 在英国脱欧时代，英国选民可能会上升。