Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 1
  • Print publication year: 2015
  • Online publication date: November 2015

16 - Congressional Polarization and Its Connection to Income Inequality: An Update

from PART V - IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary

• Polarization in Congress is the highest since Reconstruction.

• Polarization is not an artifact of roll call voting. It also occurs in campaign contributions.

• Polarization in Congress is largely due to the Republican Party becoming more conservative.

• Polarization and income inequality appear to be mutually causal.

INTRODUCTION

This essay updates our findings on political polarization in Congress and elite political actors who work through Congress to affect public policy. We also link various threads of our research with the other essays in this volume. We begin with a discussion of the methodologies that enabled us to identify the emergence of political polarization in Congress, and then turn to substantive results.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF D-NOMINATE AND DW-NOMINATE

In 1984, we (Poole and Rosenthal) published a paper in the Journal of Politics titled “The Polarization of American Politics.” We found that beginning in the mid-1970s, American politics became much more divisive at the congressional level. More Democratic legislators staked out consistently liberal positions, and more Republicans supported wholly conservative ones. The primary evidence in that study, which focused exclusively on the Senate, were ratings issued by interest groups such as the Americans for Democratic Action and the United States Chamber of Commerce.

These early findings motivated us to develop better measures of legislative ideology. Because interest group ratings are in fact aggregations of legislator roll call voting decisions, we believed that much better information would be available by scaling the individual roll call votes directly. Consequently, we adapted the standard dichotomous logit (or probit) model to develop the NOMINATE (Nominal Three-step Estimation) procedure.

NOMINATE is based on a simple spatial model of voting behavior. Each legislator is represented by a single point, and each roll call is represented by two points – one for the “yea” position and one for “nay.” These points form a spatial map that summarizes the roll calls. This spatial map is much like a road map. Tables in road atlases that tabulate the distances between every pair of sizable cities in the United States contain much the same information as the corresponding map of the United States, but a table gives you no idea what the U.S. looks like. Indeed, atlases contain maps as well as a table. Much like a road map, a spatial map formed from roll calls gives us a way of visualizing the political world of a legislature.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2010. The Disappearing Center. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Aldrich, John H., Montgomery, Jacob M., and Sparks, David B.. 2014. “Polarization and Ideology: Partisan Sources of Low Dimensionality in Scaled Roll Call Analyses.” Political Analysis 22: 1–22.
Armstrong, David, Bakker, Ryan, Carroll, Royce, Hare, Christopher, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2014. Analyzing Spatial Models of Choice and Judgment with R. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Barbera, Pablo. 2014. ”Birds of the Same Feather Tweet Together: Bayesian Ideal Point Estimation Using Twitter Data.” Working paper, New York University.
Bonica, Adam. 2014. “Mapping the Ideological Marketplace,” American Journal of Political Science 58: 367–387.
Bonica, Adam. 2013. “Ideology and Interests in the Political Marketplace,” American Journal of Political Science 57: 245–260.
Bonica, Adam, McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2013. “Why Hasn't Democracy Slowed Rising Inequality?Journal of Economic Perspectives 27 (Summer): 103–124.
Bonica, Adam, Rosenthal, Howard, and Rothman, David. 2014. “The Political Polarization of Physicians in the United States: An Analysis of Campaign Contributions to Federal Elections, 1991–2012.” Journal of the American Medical Association—Internal Medicine 174 (8): 1308–1317.
Cahoon, Lawrence S. 1975. “Locating a Set of Points Using Range Information Only.” Ph.D. diss., Department of Statistics, Carnegie-Mellon University.
Cahoon, Lawrence S., Hinich, Melvin J., and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1978. “A Statistical Multidimensional Scaling Method Based on the Spatial Theory of Voting.” In Wang, P.C., ed., Graphical Representation of Multivariate Data. New York: Academic Press.
Cahoon, Lawrence S., Hinich, Melvin J., and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1976. “A Multidimensional Statistical Procedure for Spatial Analysis.” Unpublished ms. Carnegie-Mellon University.
Carroll, Royce, Lewis, Jeffrey B., Lo, James, McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2013. “Common Space DW-NOMINATE Scores with Bootstrapped Standard Errors.” Retrieved from http://voteview.com/dwnomin_joint_house_and_senate.htm.
Carroll, Royce, Lewis, Jeffrey B., Lo, James, and Poole, Keith T.. 2011. “Scaling Roll Call Votes with wnominate in R.” Journal of Statistical Software 42: 1–21.
Carroll, Royce, Lewis, Jeffrey B., Lo, James, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2013. “The Structure of Utility in Spatial Models of Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 57 (4): 1008–1028.
Carroll, Royce, Lewis, Jeffrey B., Lo, James, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2009. “Comparing NOMINATE and IDEAL: Points of Difference and Monte Carlo Tests.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 34: 555–592.
Clausen, Aage. 1973. How Congressmen Decide: A Policy Focus. New York: St. Martin's.
Clausen, Aage, and Van Horn, C.. 1977. “The Congressional Response to a Decade of Change: 1963–1972.” Journal of Politics 39: 624–666.
Clinton, Joshua D., Jackman, Simon D., and Rivers, Douglas. 2004. “The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data: A Unified Approach.” American Political Science Review 98: 355–370.
Converse, Philip E. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Apter, David E., ed., Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press, 206–261.
Cragg, John G. and Donald, Stephen G.. 1997. “Inferring the Rank of a Matrix.” Journal of Econometrics 76: 223–250.
Dougherty, Keith L., Lynch, Michael S., and Madonna, Anthony. 2012. “Partisan Agenda Control and the Dimensionality of Congress.” Unpublished manuscript.
Ellenberg, Jordan. 2001. “Growing Apart: The Mathematical Evidence for Congress’ Growing Polarization.” Slate, December 26.
Enelow, James M. and Hinich, Melvin. 1984. The Spatial Theory of Voting. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fiorina, Morris. 2010. Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman.
Gerring, John. 1998. Party Ideologies in America, 1828–1996. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hare, Christopher, Lo, James, and Poole, Keith T.. 2014. “anominate: alpha-NOMINATE Ideal Point Estimator.” Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/anominate/index.html.
Hare, Christopher, and Poole, Keith T.. 2014. “The Polarization of Contemporary American Politics.” Polity 46: 411–429.
Hartz, Louis. 1955. The Liberal Tradition in America. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Heckman, James J., and Snyder, James M.. 1997. “Linear Probability Models of the Demand for Attributes with an Empirical Application to Estimating the Preferences of Legislators.” Rand Journal of Economics 28: 142–189.
Hofstadter, Richard. 1948 [1973]. The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It, anniversary edition. New York: Knopf.
Hinich, Melvin J., and Munger, Michael. 1997. Analytical Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hinich, Melvin J., and Munger, Michael. 1994. Ideology and the Theory of Political Choice. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Hinich, Melvin J., and Pollard, Walker. 1981. “A New Approach to the Spatial Theory of Electoral Competition.” American Journal of Political Science 25: 323–341.
Jacobson, Gary. 2010. A Divider, Not a Uniter: George W. Bush and the American People. New York: Pearson Longman.
Karol, David. 2012. “Defining Dissidence Down.” The Monkey Cage, May 9, 2012.
Koford, Kenneth. 1994. “What Can We Learn about Congressional Politics from Dimensional Studies of Roll Call Voting?Economics and Politics 6: 173–186.
Koford, Kenneth. 1991. “On Dimensionalizing Roll Call Votes in the U.S. Congress (Controversy with Keith T. Poole and Howard Rosenthal).” American Political Science Review 85: 955–975.
Koford, Kenneth. 1989. “Dimensions in Congressional Voting.” American Political Science Review 83: 949–962.
Krehbiel, Keith, and Peskowitz, Zachary. 2012. “Legislative Organization and Ideal-Point Bias.” Research Paper No. 2124, Stanford University.
MacRae, Duncan Jr. 1970. Issues and Parties in Legislative Voting. New York: Harper and Row.
MacRae, Duncan Jr. 1958. Dimensions of Congressional Voting. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Mann, Thomas E. 2014. “Politics Is More Broken Than Ever – Political Scientists Need to Admit.” The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://m.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/dysfunction/371544/.
Mann, Thomas E., and Ornstein, Norman J.. 2012. It's Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism. New York: Basic Books.
McCarty, Nolan, and Poole, Keith T.. 1998. “An Empirical Spatial Model of Congressional Campaigns.” Political Analysis 7: 1–30.
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1997. Income Redistribution and the Realignment of American Politics. Washington, DC:AEI Press.
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2013. Political Bubbles: Financial Crises and the Failure of American Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2006. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Messing, Solomon, and Bond, Robert. 2014. “Quantifying Social Media's Political Space: Estimating Ideology from Publicly Revealed Preferences on Facebook.” Working paper, Stanford University.
Ordeshook, Peter C. 1976. “The Spatial Theory of Elections: A Review and a Critique.” In Budge, Ian, Crewe, Ivor, and Farlie, Dennis, eds., Party Identification and Beyond. New York: Wiley.
Philippon, Thomas, and Reshef, Ariell. 2012. “Wages and Human Capital in the U.S. Financial Industry: 1909–2006.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 127 (4): 1551–1609.
Piketty, Thomas, and Saez, Emmanuel. 2003. “Income Inequality in the United States, 1913–1998.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118 (1): 1–39.
Poole, Keith T. 2007. “Changing Minds? Not in Congress!Public Choice 131: 435–451.
Poole, Keith T. 2005. Spatial Models of Parliamentary Voting. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Poole, Keith T. 2000. “Non-Parametric Unfolding of Binary Choice Data.” Political Analysis, 8 (3): 211–237.
Poole, Keith T. 1990. “Least Squares Metric, Unidimensional Scaling of Multivariate Linear Models.” Psychometrika 55: 123–149.
Poole, Keith T. 1988. “Recent Developments in Analytical Models of Voting in the U.S. Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 13: 117–133.
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2007. Ideology and Congress. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Press.
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press.
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1994. “Dimensional Simplification and Economic Theories of Legislative Behavior.” Economics and Politics 6: 163–172.
Poole, Keith T. and Rosenthal, Howard. 1991a. “Patterns of Congressional Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 35: 228–278.
Poole, Keith T. and Rosenthal, Howard. 1991b. “On Dimensionalizing Roll Call Votes in the U.S. Congress (Controversy with Kenneth Koford).” American Political Science Review 85: 955–975.
Poole, Keith T. and Rosenthal, Howard. 1984. “The Polarization of American Politics,” Journal of Politics 46: 1061–1079.
Poole, Keith T., Sowell, Fallaw B., and Spear, Stephen. 1992. “Evaluating Dimensionality in Spatial Voting Models.” Mathematical and Computer Modeling 16: 85–101.
Saez, Emmanuel. 2013. “Tables and Figures Updated to September 2013.” Retrieved from http://eml.berkeley.edu/~saez/TabFig2012prel.xls.
Shor, Boris, and McCarty, Nolan. 2011The Ideological Mapping of American Legislatures.” American Political Science Review 105 (August): 530–551.
Weisberg, Herbert F. 1968. “Dimensional Analysis of Legislative Roll Calls.” Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan.