Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-20T23:02:41.803Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trends in Public Support for Welfare Spending: How the Economy Matters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2019

Christopher Wlezien  and
Stuart Soroka Open the ORCID record for Stuart Soroka [Opens in a new window]
Christopher Wlezien
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Austin, USA
Stuart Soroka*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As spending on welfare in the United States has increased over time, preferences for more spending have remained fairly stationary. Given that previous research shows that the public adjusts its welfare spending preference thermostatically in response to welfare spending, the over-time pattern of preferences implies that something must be producing an increase in public support, but what? We address this question, focusing on individuals' demographics and a set of aggregate economic variables, both macroeconomic and distributional. Results reveal that individual-level factors matter little to the temporal variation and aggregate economics matter a lot: there are pro-cyclical and counter-cyclical elements in spending preferences and a dampening effect of income inequality over time. The combination of these variables accounts for the underlying trend in welfare spending preferences in the US, and the method used to reveal these dynamics can be used to analyze preference evolution in other spending domains and countries.

Keywords

aggregate economic variablesbudgetary policypublic opinionspending preferencewelfare policy
Type
Article
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 51 , Issue 1 , January 2021 , pp. 163 - 180
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bartels, LM (1991) Constituency opinion and congressional policy making: the Reagan defense build-up. American Political Science Review 85 (2), 457–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, LM (2008) Unequal Democracy. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Bartels, LM (2015) The social welfare deficit: public opinion, policy responsiveness, and political inequality in affluent democracies. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Bartle, J, Dellepiane Avellaneda, S and McGann, A (2018) Policy accommodation versus electoral turnover: policy representation in Britain, 1945–2015. Journal of Public Policy. Currently in First View.Google Scholar
Bartle, J, Delleliane-Avellaneda, S and Stimson, J (2011) The moving centre: preferences for government activity in Britain, 1950–2005. British Journal of Political Science 41 (2), 259–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branham, JA, Soroka, SN and Wlezien, C (2017) When do the rich win? Political Science Quarterly 132 (1), 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, C and Manza, J (2007) Why Welfare States Persist: Public Opinion and the Future of Social Provision. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunner, E, Ross, SL and Washington, E (2013) Does less income mean less representation? American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 5 (2), 53–76.Google Scholar
Burstein, P (2010) Public opinion, public policy, and democracy. In Leicht, K and Jenkins, C (eds), Handbook of Politics. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Clarke, H and Dutt, N (1991) Measuring value change in western industrialized societies: the impact of unemployment. American Political Science Review 79, 10–27.Google Scholar
Duch, R and Taylor, M (1993) Postmaterialism and the economic condition. American Journal of Political Science 37, 747–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durr, R (1993) What moves policy sentiment? American Political Science Review 87 (1), 158–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichenberg, RC and Stoll, R (2003) Representing defense: democratic control of the defense budget in the United States and Western Europe. Journal of Conflict Resolution 47 (4), 399–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, C (2017) Putting Inequality in Context. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, C and Stimson, JA (2012) Ideology in America. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enns, P and Wlezien, C, eds (2011) Who Gets Represented? New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Enns, P and Wlezien, C (2017) Understanding equation balance in time series regression. The Political Methodologist 24 (2), 2–13.Google Scholar
Enns, PK and Kellstedt, PM (2008) Policy mood and political sophistication: why everybody moves mood. British Journal of Political Science 38 (3), 433–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, RS and Tedin, KL (2015) American Public Opinion, 9th edn. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, RS, MacKuen, MB and Stimson, JA (2002) The Macro Polity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Funk, CL (2000) The dual influence of self-interest and societal interest in public opinion. Political Research Quarterly 53 (1), 37–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilens, M (2012) Affluence and Influence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gilens, M and Page, B (2014) Testing theories of American politics: elites, interest groups and average citizens. Perspectives on Politics 12, 564–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giuiliano, P and Spilimbergo, A (2014) Growing up in a recession. Review of Economic Studies 81 (2), 787–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, JM (1998) Individuals, institutions, and public preferences over public finance. American Political Science Review 92 (3), 513–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetherington, M and Rudolph, TJ (2015) Why Washington Won’t Work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, R and Abramson, P (1994) Economic security and value change. American Political Science Review 88, 336–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, W (2009) The public thermostat, political responsiveness and error-correction: border control and asylum in Britain, 1994–2007. British Journal of Political Science 39, 847–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, NJ and Enns, PK (2010) Inequality and the dynamics of public opinion: the self-reinforcing link between economic inequality and mass preferences. American Journal of Political Science 54 (4), 855–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, VO (1961) Public Opinion and American Democracy. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Kreps, DM (1990) A Course in Microeconomic Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lax, JR and Phillips, JH (2011) The democratic deficit in the states. American Journal of Political Science 56, 148–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margalit, Y (2013) Explaining social policy preferences: evidence from the great recession. American Political Science Review 107, 80–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, WE et al. (1999) Policy Representation in Western Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Monroe, A (1979) Consistency between constituency preferences and national policy decisions. American Politics Quarterly 12, 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monroe, AD (1998) Public opinion and public policy, 1980–1993. Public Opinion Quarterly 62 (1), 6–28.10.1086/297828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musgrave, RA (1985) A brief history of fiscal doctrine. In Auerbach, A and Feldstein, M (eds), Handbook of Public Economics, vol 1. New York: North Holland, pp. 1–59.Google Scholar
Naumann, E, Buss, C and Bahr, J (2015) How unemployment experience affects support for the welfare state: a real panel approach. European Sociological Review 32 (1), 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neundorf, A and Soroka, S (2018) The origins of redistributive policy preferences: political socialization with and without a welfare state. West European Politics 41 (2), 400–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petry, F (1999) The Opinion-Policy Relationship in Canada. The Journal of Politics 61 (2), 540–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, GB (2011) Party polarization and the ideological congruence of governments. In Dalton, R and Anderson, C (eds), Citizens, Context, and Choice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rasinski, K (1989) The effect of question wording on support for government spending. Public Opinion Quarterly 58 (3), 388–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rigby, E and Wright, GC (2013) Political parties and representation of the poor in the American states. American Journal of Political Science 57 (3), 552–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soroka, SN and Wlezien, C (2008) On the limits to inequality in representation. PS: Political Science and Politics 41 (2), 319–327.Google Scholar
Soroka, SN and Wlezien, C (2010) Degrees of Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Soroka, S and Wlezien, C (2019) Replication Data for: Trends in Public Support for Welfare Spending: How the Economy Matters, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/TYJOMG, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:0ATrQK5GG65pZ1S1kYAeEA==[fileUNF].Google Scholar
Stevenson, RT (2001) The economy and policy mood: a fundamental dynamic of democratic politics? American Journal of Political Science 45 (3), 620–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stimson, JA (2004) Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stimson, J (1991) Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and Swings. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Ura, J and Ellis, C (2012) Partisan moods: polarization and the dynamics of mass party preferences. Journal of Politics 74 (1), 277–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weissberg, R (1978) Collective vs. Dyadic representation in congress. American Political Science Review 72, 535–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C (1995) The public as thermostat: dynamics of preferences for spending. American Journal of Political Science 39, 981–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C (2004) Patterns of representation: dynamics of public preferences and policy. Journal of Politics 66, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C (2017) Policy (mis)representation and the cost of ruling: US presidential elections in comparative perspective. Comparative Political Studies 50 (6), 711–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C and Soroka, S (2012) Political Institutions and the Opinion-Policy Link. West European Politics 35 (6), 1407–1432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Wlezien and Soroka supplementary material

Appendix

Download Wlezien and Soroka supplementary material(File)
File 276.9 KB
Supplementary material: Link

Wlezien and Soroka Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/TYJOMG
Link