Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T11:35:40.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preference Gaps and Inequality in Representation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2009

Martin Gilens
Martin Gilens
Affiliation:
Princeton University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a recent article in PS, Soroka and Wlezien (2008) argue that the policy preferences of low- and high-income Americans rarely differ, and therefore that “regardless of whose preferences policymakers follow … policy will end up in essentially the same place” (325). In this article, I analyze a much larger and more diverse set of policies than those examined by Soroka and Wlezien and show that income-based preference gaps are much larger and more widespread than their data suggest. In terms of federal government policy, the affluent are far better represented than the poor; the findings in this paper indicate that this representational inequality has substantial repercussions across a wide range of policy issues.

Type
Features
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 335 - 341
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 2009

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, Larry M. 2002. “Economic Inequality and Political Representation.” Presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2003. “Public Opinion and Democratic Responsiveness: Who Gets What They Want From Government?” Princeton, NJ: Center for the Study of Democratic Politics.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2005. “Inequality and Democratic Responsiveness.” Public Opinion Quarterly 69 (5): 778–96.10.1093/poq/nfi058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilens, Martin. n.d. “Paying the Piper: Economic Inequality and Democratic Responsiveness in the United States.” Unpublished book manuscript, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Griffin, John D., and Flavin, Patrick. 2007. “Racial Differences in Information, Expectations, and Accountability.” Journal of Politics 69 (1): 220–36.10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00506.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, John D., and Newman, Brian. 2007. “The Unequal Representation of Latinos and Whites.” Journal of Politics 69 (4): 1032–46.10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00605.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gujarati, Damodar N. 1995. Basic Econometrics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Lawrence R., and Page, Benjamin I.. 2005. “Who Influences U.S. Foreign Policy?” American Political Science Review 99 (1): 107–23.10.1017/S000305540505152XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N., and Wlezien, Christopher. 2008. “On the Limits to Inequality in Representation.” PS: Political Science and Politics 41 (2): 319–27.Google Scholar
Task Force on Inequality, and American Democracy. 2004. “American Democracy in an Age of Rising Inequality.” Perspectives on Politics 2 (4): 651–66.10.1017/S153759270404040XCrossRefGoogle Scholar