Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3)

In a democracy, all citizens—the rich, middle-class, poor alike—must have some ability to influence what their government does. Few people would expect that influence to be identical: those with higher incomes and better connections will always be more influential. But if influence becomes so unequal that the wishes of most citizens are ignored most of the time, a country’s claim to be a democracy is cast in doubt. And that is exactly what I found in my analyses of the link between public preferences and government policy in the U.S. In my recent book, Affluence & Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America, I examined thousands of proposed policy changes over the past four decades. I compared the strength of support (or opposition) of survey respondents at different income levels with actual policy outcomes in the years following the survey.

As expected, greater public support increased the likelihood of a proposed policy change being adopted, as shown in the first chart below.

In many areas of government policy, the preferences of lower and higher income Americans are similar, and in these cases, the strength of the policy/preference link is necessarily similar as well. I found little difference by income level for about half the proposed policy changes in my dataset, including most aspects of defense, environmental policy, the war on drugs, family leave, and even antipoverty policy (where, for example, the affluent and the poor alike support strengthening work requirements, job training, and child care for welfare recipients).

When preferences across income groups do diverge, however, I found that the association with policy outcomes persisted for the affluent but disappeared for the middle class and the poor, as the second chart shows. (I used the 90th, 50th and 10th income percentiles to represent these three groups.)

…..

This is part of an on going series, read the rest of the article at The Monkey Cage

by Martin Gilens

9
Leave a Reply

avatar
9 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
0 Comment authors
The War We Are (Regrettably) Not FightingWhat Is the Value of Social Science?Numerical indigestion: how much data is really good for us?The Study of Conflict Mediation by Political ScientistsMoney Degrades Our Ability to Empathize Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
trackback

[…] Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) […]

trackback

[…] should learn how to influence government policy Political Science Serving the Public Interest Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) Share and Enjoy: This entry was posted in Academic Funding, Featured, International Debate, News, […]

trackback

[…] Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) […]

trackback

[…] Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) Share and Enjoy: This entry was posted in Impact, International Debate, News and tagged Bernd Beber, Hillary Clinton, Jacob Bercovitch Leah Simpson, Josua Tucker, Kyle Beardsley, Mediation, Peace and Change, political science, social science, The Mediation Dilemma, The Monkey Cage. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « Are You a Viking? University, Masculinity and the Language of Violence Round-up of recent social science research (from SAGE Insight) » […]

trackback

[…] Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) Share and Enjoy: This entry was posted in Impact, Interdisciplinarity, International Debate, News, Research Methods, Science & Social Science and tagged 47%, behavioral science, Christine Ma-Kellams, economics, Empathy, Experiments, Finance, inequality, Jim Blascovich, pacific standard, Psychology, Romney, Santa Barbara, Science of Ethics, social science, Tom Jacobs, UNiversity of California. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « ESRC Festival of Social Science, and the ‘Big Data’ Debate […]

trackback

[…] Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) […]

trackback

[…] Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) Share and Enjoy: This entry was posted in Featured, Impact, Interdisciplinarity, International Debate, News, Public Engagement, Public Policy and tagged David Tyfield, debt, economics, financial crisis, free market ideology, Hurrican Katrina, Hurricane Rita, Industialised, John Urry, Keynes, Keynesian, labor, labour, Lancaster University, Market Capitalist, Neo-Liberal, peak oil, Privatisation, privatization, resource shortage, social science, sociology, Sylvia Walby, Tim Dant. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « Round-up of recent social science research (from SAGE Insight) […]

trackback

[…] Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) […]

trackback

[…] Economic Inequality and Political Power (Part 1 of 3) […]

Skip to toolbar