A congressional election is right around the corner. A small but vocal group of Republicans, hoping to unseat Democratic incumbents in the upcoming election, have received a significant amount of attention from the media. They charge ongoing fiscal irresponsibility on the part of the current members of Congress, and their accusations have struck a chord with the American public. The Republicans are using the House Banking Scandal as an example of the type of fiscal improprieties that are "deeply ingrained in the minds of our current elected officials." The House Banking Scandal, also dubbed "Rubbergate," involved the discovery that certain members of the House of Representatives bounced numerous bank checks with impunity in the early 1990s. At the time, Rubbergate received significant press, as, for example, newspapers across the country listed the names and numbers of checks bounced by their representatives. Now the Republican hopefuls are reviving the Rubbergate scandal.

Frank works as a statistician for the Republican party. He has been asked to study the earlier Rubbergate scandal for possible political ammunition. He has collected a random sample of 146 members of the 1992 House of Representatives. The data is listed below. Eight characteristics were collected about each representative. Whether the representative wrote bad checks is indicated by the variable named CHECKS. This variable is coded 1 for a bad-check writer and 0 otherwise. PARTY is the variable indicating political affiliation. Democrats are coded with 1, and Republicans are coded 0. There weren't any Independents in this random sample. SERVICE is the total number of years of service in the House. Service beginning in or after November in a given year is not counted as a year of service in this data set. The representative's age in years is recorded in the variable named AGE. VOTES measures the returns (in percentages) for the most recent election in which that member participated. DISTRICT measures the representative's home district population rounded to the nearest thousand. STATE is like DISTRICT except it is the population of the representative's home state. If the representative wrote bad checks, Frank also recorded how many he or she wrote. This information is in the variable called BADCHKS.

Frank wants a report that characterizes the data set. In particular, what should he say about the following issues?

• What is the general nature of the sample (i.e. descriptive statistics) in terms of average and typical fluctuation around the average for the variables named SERVICE, AGE, VOTES, DISTRICT, and STATE?
• How do these variables differ in a comparison of check-bouncers and non-check-bouncers (not considering the number of bad checks at this point)? Are there any statistically significant differences?
• How does party affiliation enter into the analysis? Is there a statistical difference between the parties in bouncing checks, or in the number of bounced checks?

Make sure your report includes recommendations to the Republican party as to any information that might further their campaign and highlight fiscal irresponsibility by the Democrats.

PLEASE SEE DOCUMENT HERE, QUESTION 4 FOR DATA SET

https://www.coursehero.com/u/file/76060532/HomeworkSet5-1020doc/#/question