Inequality and democratic responsiveness
Inequality and democratic responsiveness
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/poq/nfi058
复制
发表时间：
2005-01-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Gilens, M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gilens, M
通过允许选民在具有相互竞争的政策取向的候选人中进行选择，并通过激励现任者按照公众期望的方向制定政策，选举被认为是将政府政策与被统治者的偏好联系起来的基础。在这篇文章中，我将研究偏好/政策联系在多大程度上偏向于高收入美国人的偏好。使用1981年至2002年期间关于拟议政策变化的近2000个调查问题的原始数据集，1发现公众想要什么和政府做什么之间存在适度强的关系，尽管对现状有很大的偏见。但我也发现，当不同收入水平的美国人的政策偏好不同时，实际政策结果强烈反映了最富裕人群的偏好，但与穷人或中等收入美国人的偏好几乎没有关系。我发现，政府对不同收入公民的反应存在巨大差异，这与美国人所珍视的政治平等理想形成鲜明对比。虽然完全的政治平等是一个不切实际的目标，但这种程度的代表性偏见使人们对我们社会的民主特征产生了疑问。
By allowing voters to choose among candidates with competing policy orientations and by providing incentives for incumbents to shape policy in the direction the public desires, elections are thought to provide the foundation that links government policy to the preferences of the governed. In this article I examine the extent to which the preference/policy link is biased toward the preferences of high-income Americans. Using an original data set of almost two thousand survey questions on proposed policy changes between 1981 and 2002, 1 find a moderately strong relationship between what the public wants and what the government does, albeit with a strong bias toward the status quo. But I also find that when Americans with different income levels differ in their policy preferences, actual policy outcomes strongly reflect the preferences of the most affluent but bear virtually no relationship to the preferences of poor or middle-income Americans. The vast discrepancy I find in government responsiveness to citizens with different incomes stands in stark contrast to the ideal of political equality that Americans hold dear. Although perfect political equality is an unrealistic goal, representational biases of this magnitude call into question the very democratic character of our society.