Income Inequality and State Parties: Who Gets Represented?

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Gerald C. Wright, E. Rigby
{"title":"Income Inequality and State Parties: Who Gets Represented?","authors":"Gerald C. Wright, E. Rigby","doi":"10.1177/1532440020912461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent studies of representation at the national and state levels have provided evidence that elected officials’ votes, political parties’ platforms, and enacted policy choices are more responsive to the preferences of the affluent, while those with average incomes and the poor have little or no impact on the political process. Yet, this research on the dominance of the affluent has overlooked key partisan differences in the electorate. In this era of hyperpartisanship, we argue that representation occurs through the party system, and we test whether taking this reality into account changes the story of policy dominance by the rich. We combine data on public preferences and state party positions to test for income bias in parties’ representation of their own co-partisans. The results show an interesting pattern in which underrepresentation of the poor is driven by Democratic parties pushing the more liberal social policy stances of rich Democrats and Republican parties reflecting the particularly conservative economic policy preferences of rich Republicans. Thus, we have ample evidence that the wealthy, more often than not, do call the shots, but that the degree to which this disproportionate party responsiveness produces less representative policies depends on the party in power and the policy dimension being considered. We conclude by linking this pattern of influence and “coincidental representation” to familiar changes which define the transformation of the New Deal party system.","PeriodicalId":47181,"journal":{"name":"State Politics & Policy Quarterly","volume":"20 1","pages":"395 - 415"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1532440020912461","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"State Politics & Policy Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532440020912461","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Recent studies of representation at the national and state levels have provided evidence that elected officials’ votes, political parties’ platforms, and enacted policy choices are more responsive to the preferences of the affluent, while those with average incomes and the poor have little or no impact on the political process. Yet, this research on the dominance of the affluent has overlooked key partisan differences in the electorate. In this era of hyperpartisanship, we argue that representation occurs through the party system, and we test whether taking this reality into account changes the story of policy dominance by the rich. We combine data on public preferences and state party positions to test for income bias in parties’ representation of their own co-partisans. The results show an interesting pattern in which underrepresentation of the poor is driven by Democratic parties pushing the more liberal social policy stances of rich Democrats and Republican parties reflecting the particularly conservative economic policy preferences of rich Republicans. Thus, we have ample evidence that the wealthy, more often than not, do call the shots, but that the degree to which this disproportionate party responsiveness produces less representative policies depends on the party in power and the policy dimension being considered. We conclude by linking this pattern of influence and “coincidental representation” to familiar changes which define the transformation of the New Deal party system.
收入不平等与缔约国:谁有代表?
最近对国家和州一级代表性的研究提供了证据,表明民选官员的选票、政党的纲领和制定的政策选择更能响应富人的偏好,而那些收入平均的人和穷人对政治进程几乎没有影响。然而,这项关于富人主导地位的研究忽略了选民中关键的党派差异。在这个超党派时代,我们认为代表权是通过政党制度产生的,我们测试了考虑到这一现实是否会改变富人政策主导的故事。我们结合了公众偏好和缔约国立场的数据,以测试各政党代表其共同党派的收入偏见。结果显示了一种有趣的模式,在这种模式中,穷人代表性不足是由民主党推动富裕民主党和共和党更自由的社会政策立场所驱动的,这反映了富裕共和党特别保守的经济政策偏好。因此,我们有充分的证据表明,富人往往是发号施令的,但这种不成比例的政党反应在多大程度上产生了不太具有代表性的政策,这取决于执政党和所考虑的政策层面。最后,我们将这种影响模式和“巧合代表”与定义新政政党制度转型的常见变化联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: State Politics & Policy Quarterly (SPPQ) features studies that develop general hypotheses of political behavior and policymaking and test these hypotheses using the unique methodological advantages of the states. It also includes field review essays and a section entitled “The Practical Researcher,” which is a service-oriented feature designed to provide a data, methodological, and assessment resource for those conducting research on state politics. SPPQ is the official journal of the State Politics and Policy section of the American Political Science Association and is published by the University of Illinois Press for the Institute of Legislative Studies at the University of Illinois at Springfield.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信