Government representation of public opinion is a central component of democracy. Previous studies have documented a robust congruence between aggregated public opinion and public policies in the American states. However, an equally important question for evaluating the quality of democracy is “Who does government respond to when formulating public policies?” I investigate differential policy representation based on citizens’ household incomes and find that citizens with low incomes receive little substantive political representation (compared with more affluent citizens) in the policy decisions made by their state governments. This unequal policy representation occurs for both the general liberalism of state policies and on specific social issues like the death penalty and abortion. These findings suggest that examining the variation in political inequality across the 50 states can help scholars to better understand and explain “unequal democracy” in the United States.
AchenC. (1978). Measuring representation. American Journal of Political Science, 22, 475-510.
2.
AnsolabehereS.SnyderJ. M.StewartC. (2001). Candidate positioning in U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 136-159.
3.
ArceneauxK. (2002). Direct democracy and the link between public opinion and state abortion policy. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 2, 372-387.
4.
BaldassarriD.BearmanP. (2007). Dynamics of political polarization. American Sociological Review, 72, 784-811.
5.
BartelsL. M. (1991). Constituency opinion and congressional policy making: The Reagan defense buildup. American Political Science Review, 85, 457-474.
6.
BartelsL. M. (2008). Unequal democracy: The political economy of the new gilded age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7.
BerryJ. M.PortneyK. E.ThomsonK. (1993). The rebirth of urban democracy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
8.
BishopB. (2009). The big sort: Why the clustering of like-minded American is tearing us apart. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
9.
BraceP.Sims-ButlerK.ArceneauxK.JohnsonM. (2002). Public opinion in the American states: New perspectives using national survey data. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 173-189.
10.
BurdenB. C. (2005). Institutions and policy representation in the states. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 5, 373-393.
11.
BursteinP. (2003). The impact of public opinion on public policy: A review and an agenda. Political Research Quarterly, 56, 29-40.
12.
CarminesE. G.StimsonJ. A. (1980). The two faces of issue voting. American Political Science Review, 74, 78-91.
13.
ClintonJ. D. (2006). Representation in Congress: Constituents and roll calls in the 106th House. Journal of Politics, 68, 397-409.
14.
DahlR. A. (1961). Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
15.
DahlR. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16.
DreierP.MollenkopfJ.SwanstromT. (2001). Place matters: Metropolitics for the twenty-first century. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
17.
EriksonR. S.BhattiY. (2011). How poorly are the poor represented in the US Senate? In EnnsP.WlezianC. (Eds.), Who gets represented? (pp. 223-246). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
18.
EriksonR. S.MacKuenM. B.StimsonJ. A. (2002). The macro polity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19.
EriksonR. S.WrightG. C.McIverJ. P. (1993). Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and policy in the American states. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
20.
FordingR. C. (1997). The conditional effect of violence as a political tactic: Mass insurgency, welfare generosity, and electoral context in the American states. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 1-29.
21.
GelmanA.ParkD.ShorB.BafumiJ.CortinaJ. (2008). Red state, blue state, rich state, poor state: Why Americans vote the way they do. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
GilensM. (2005). Inequality and democratic responsiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69, 778-796.
23.
GilensM. (2009). Preference gaps and inequality in representation. PS: Political Science & Politics, 42, 335-341.
24.
GimpelJ. G.SchuknechtJ. E. (2001). Interstate migration and electoral politics. Journal of Politics, 63, 207-231.
25.
GimpelJ. G.SchuknechtJ. E. (2003). Patchwork nation: Sectionalism and political change in American politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
26.
GormleyW. T. (1986). Regulatory issue networks in a federal system. Polity, 18, 595-620.
27.
GrattetR.JennessV.CurryT. R. (1998). The homogenization and differentiation of hate crime law in the United States, 1978 to 1995: Innovation and diffusion in the criminalization of bigotry. American Sociological Review, 63, 286-307.
28.
GrayV.HansonR. L. (Eds.). (2008). Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (9th ed.). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
29.
GrayV.LoweryD.FellowesM.McAteeA. (2004). Public opinion, public policy, and organized interests in the American states. Political Research Quarterly, 57, 411-420.
30.
GriffinJ. D.FlavinP. (2007). Racial differences in information, expectations, and accountability. Journal of Politics, 69, 220-236.
31.
GriffinJ. D.NewmanB. (2005). Are voters better represented?Journal of Politics, 67, 1206-1227.
32.
GriffinJ. D.NewmanB. (2008). Minority report: Evaluating political equality in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
33.
HackerJ. S. (2002). The divided welfare state: The battle over public and private social benefits in the United States. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
34.
HagenM. G.LascherE. L.CamobrecoJ. F. (2001). Response to Matsusaka: Estimating the effect of ballot initiatives on policy responsiveness. Journal of Politics, 63, 1257-1263.
35.
Haider-MarkelD. P. (2002). Regulating hate: State and local influences on hate crime law enforcement. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 2, 126-160.
36.
Haider-MarkelD. P.KaufmanM. S. (2006). Public opinion and policy making in the culture wars: Is there a connection between opinion and state policy on gay and lesbian issues? In CohenJ. E. (Ed.), Public opinion in state politics (pp. 163-182). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
37.
HaysS. P.EslerM.HaysC. E. (1996). Environmental commitment among the states. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 26, 41-58.
38.
HillK. Q.Hinton-AndersonA. (1995). Pathways of representation: A causal analysis of public opinion–policy linkages. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 924-935.
39.
HillK. Q.HurleyP. A. (1999). Dyadic representation reappraised. American Journal of Political Science, 43, 109-137.
40.
HillK. Q.LeighleyJ. E. (1994). Mobilizing institutions and class representation in U. S. state electorates. Political Research Quarterly, 47, 137-150.
41.
HillK. Q.LeighleyJ. E.Hinton-AndersonA. (1995). Lower-class mobilization and policy linkage in the U.S. States. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 75-86.
42.
HurleyP. A.HillK. Q. (2003). Beyond the demand-input model: A theory of representational linkages. Journal of Politics, 65, 304-326.
43.
JacobsL. R.PageB. I. (2005). Who influences U.S. foreign policy?American Political Science Review, 99, 107-123.
44.
JacobsL. R.SkocpolT. (Eds.). (2005). Inequality and American democracy: What we know and what we need to learn. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
45.
JargowskyP. A. (1996). Take the money and run: Economic segregation in U.S. metropolitan areas. American Sociological Review, 61, 984-998.
46.
JonesB. S.NorranderB. (1996). The reliability of aggregated public opinion measures. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 295-309.
47.
KellyN. J. (2009). The politics of income inequality in the United States. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press
48.
KeyV. O. (1949). Southern politics in state and nation. New York, NY: Knopf.
49.
KeyV. O. (1961). Public opinion and American democracy. New York, NY: Knopf.
50.
KlingmanD.LammersW. W. (1984). The general policy liberalism factor in American state politics. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 598-610.
51.
LaxJ. R.PhillipsJ. H. (2009a). Gay rights in the states: Public opinion and policy responsiveness. American Political Science Review, 103, 367-386.
52.
LaxJ. R.PhillipsJ. H. (2009b). How should we estimate public opinion in the states?American Journal of Political Science, 53, 107-121.
53.
MartinP. S. (2003). Voting’s rewards: Voter turnout, attentive publics, and congressional allocation of federal money. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 110-127.
54.
McCartyN.PooleK. T.RosenthalH. (2006). Polarized America: The dance of political ideology and unequal riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
55.
MillerW. E.StokesD. E. (1963). Constituency influence in Congress. American Political Science Review, 57, 45-56.
56.
MooneyC. Z.LeeM. (2000). The influence of values on consensus and contentious morality policy: U.S. death penalty reform, 1956-1982. Journal of Politics, 62, 223-239.
57.
MonroeA. D. (1998). Public opinion and public policy, 1980-1993. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 6-28.
58.
NiceD. C. (1983). Representation in the states: Policymaking and ideology. Social Science Quarterly, 64, 404-411.
59.
NorranderB. (2001). Measuring state public opinion with the Senate National Election Study. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 1, 111-125.
60.
NorranderB.WilcoxC. (1999). Public opinion and policymaking in the states: The case of post-Roe abortion policy. Policy Studies Journal, 27, 707-722.
61.
PageB. I.ShapiroR. (1983). Effects of public opinion on policy. American Political Science Review, 77, 175-190.
62.
ParkD. K.GelmanA.BafumiJ. (2006). State level opinions from national surveys: Poststratification using multilevel logistic regression. In CohenJ. E. (Ed.), Public opinion in state politics (pp. 209-228). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
63.
PivenF. F.ClowardR. A. (1988). Why Americans don’t vote. New York, NY: Pantheon.
64.
PowellL. W. (1982). Issue representation in Congress. Journal of Politics, 44, 658-678.
65.
RigbyE.WrightG. C. (2011). Whose statehouse democracy: Policy responsiveness to poor versus rich constituents in poor versus rich states. In EnnsP.WlezianC. (Eds.), Who gets represented? (pp. 223-246). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
66.
RosenstoneS. J.HansenJ. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York, NY: Macmillan.
67.
SchattschneiderE. E. (1960). The semisovereign people: A realist’s view of democracy in America. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press.
68.
SchumakerP. D.GetterR. W. (1977). Responsiveness bias in 51 American communities. American Journal of Political Science, 21, 247-281.
69.
SorensJ.MuediniF.RugerW. P. (2008). U.S. state and local public policies in 2006: A new database. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 8, 309-326.
70.
SorokaS. N.WlezienC. (2008). On the limits to inequality in representation. PS: Political Science & Politics, 41, 319-327.
71.
UraJ. D.EllisC. R. (2008). Income, preferences, and the dynamics of policy responsiveness. PS: Political Science & Politics, 41, 785-794.
72.
VerbaS. (2003). Would the dream of political equality turn out to be a nightmare?Perspectives on Politics, 1, 663-680.
73.
VerbaS.NieN. H. (1972). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
74.
VerbaS.OrrenG. R. (1985). Equality in America: The view from the top. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
75.
VerbaS.SchlozmanK. L.BradyH. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
76.
WeisbergR. (1978). Collective vs. dyadic representation in Congress. American Political Science Review, 72, 535-547.
77.
WlezienC. (2004). Patterns of representation: Dynamics of public preferences and policy. Journal of Politics, 68, 1-24.
78.
WolfingerR. E.RosenstoneS. J. (1980). Who votes?New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
