Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
  • Home
EnglishFrançais
Perspectives on Politics Perspectives on Politics

Article contents

Abandoning the Middle: The Bush Tax Cuts and the Limits of Democratic Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2005

Jacob S. Hacker  and
Paul Pierson
Jacob S. Hacker
Affiliation:
Yale University (jacob.hacker@yale.edu)
Paul Pierson
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley (pierson@berkeley.edu)
Get access
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts represent dramatic legislative breakthroughs. Taken together, they have fundamentally reshaped the nation's fiscal landscape. In view of the voluminous and largely sanguine literature on American democratic responsiveness, one might assume that this policy turnaround was broadly consistent with voters' priorities. In this article, we show that—in contradiction to this prevailing view, as well as the claims of Larry Bartels in this issue—the substance of the tax cuts was in fact sharply at odds with public preferences. Tax policy was pulled radically off center, we argue, by the intersection of two forces: (1) the increasing incentives of political elites to cater to their partisan and ideological “base”; and (2) the increasing capacity of politicians who abandon the middle to escape political retribution. In accounting for these centrifugal forces, we stress, as others have, increasing partisanship and polarization, as well as the growing sophistication of political message-control. Yet we also emphasize a pivotal factor that is too often overlooked: the deliberate crafting of policy to distort public perceptions, set the future political agenda, and minimize the likelihood of voter backlash. By showing how politicians can engineer policy shifts that are at odds with majority public preferences, we hope to provoke a broader discussion of voters' capacity to protect their interests in America's representative democracy.Jacob S. Hacker is Peter Strauss Family Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University (jacob.hacker@yale.edu) and author of The Divided Welfare State: The Battle over Public and Private Social Benefits in the United States and The Road to Nowhere: The Genesis of President Clinton's Plan for Health Security. Paul Pierson is Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley (pierson@berkeley.edu), where he holds the Avice Saint Chair in Public Policy. He is the author of Politics in Time: History, Institutions and Social Analysis and Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher, and the Politics of Retrenchment. The authors are grateful for the comments and suggestions of Akhil Amar, Daniel Carpenter, Peter Hall, Michael Heany, Jennifer Hochschild, Richard Kogan, Theodore Marmor, Andrew Martin, David Mayhew, Nolan McCarty, Bruce Nesmith, Peter Orszag, Eric Schickler, Theda Skocpol, Richard Vallely, Robert van Houweling, Joseph White, and three anonymous reviewers, as well as participants in a workshop at Harvard University sponsored by the Russell Sage Foundation. Rachel Goodman, Pearline Kyi, Joanne Lim, and Alan Schoenfeld provided able research assistance. A previous version of this paper was presented at the 2003 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association.

Type
Research Article
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , March 2005 , pp. 33 - 53
Copyright
© 2005 American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.
If you should have access and can't see this content please contact technical support.

References

Americans for Tax Reform. 1986. Questions and answers about the National Taxpayer Protection Pledge. http://www.atr.org/nationalpledge/index.html.
Ansolabehere, Stephen, James M. Snyder Jr., and Charles Stewart III 2001. Candidate positioning in U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science 45 (1): 136–59.Google Scholar
Arnold, R. Douglas. 1990. The logic of congressional action. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Bai, Matt. 2003. Fight club. New York Times Magazine, August 10, 24–27.
Bartels, Larry M. 2002. Economic inequality and political representation. Paper read at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, August.
Bartels, Larry M. 2003. Is “popular rule” possible? Polls, political psychology, and democracy. Brookings Review 21 (3): 12–15.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 2005. Homer gets a tax cut: Inequality and public policy in the American mind. Perspectives on Politics 3 (1): 15–31.Google Scholar
Bowman, Karlyn H. 2004. Public opinion on taxes. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute. http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.16838/pub_detail.asp.
Brady, David W., and Craig Volden. 1998. Revolving gridlock: Politics and policy from Carter to Clinton. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Burden, Barry. 2004. Candidate positioning in U.S. congressional elections. British Journal of Political Science 34 (2): 211–27.Google Scholar
Burman, Leonard, William G. Gale, and Jeff Rohaly. 2003. The AMT: Problems and projections. Tax Notes, July 7, 105–117.
Bush, George W. 2000. Statements at Republican presidential debate, South Carolina, February 15.
Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes. 1960. The American voter. New York: Wiley.
Carey, Eliza Newlin. 2002. Moore's Club for Growth causing a stir in the GOP. National Journal 3128. October 26.Google Scholar
Chong, Dennis. 2000. Rational lives: Norms and values in politics and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Citizens for Tax Justice. 2002. Year-by-year analysis of the Bush tax cuts growing tilt to the very rich. http://www.ctj.org/html/gwb0602.htm.
Cohen, Jeffrey E. 1997. Presidential responsiveness and public policy-making: The public and the policies that presidents choose. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Congressional Budget Office. 2001. The budget and economic outlook: Fiscal years 2001–2010. Washington, DC. January. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/27xx/doc2727/entire-report.pdf.
Converse, Philip E. 1964. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In Ideology and discontent, ed. D. Apter, 206–61. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.
Converse, Philip E. 1990. Popular representation and the distribution of information. In Information and democratic processes, ed. John A. Ferejohn and James H. Kuklinski, 369–90. Urbana: University of Illinois.
Dahl, Robert. 1961. Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Davis, Michelle. 2004. Tomorrow's press conference unveiling the budget [memo]. February 27, 2001 [refd June 8, 2004]. http://thepriceofloyalty.ronsuskind.com/thebushfiles/archives/000058.html.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
Eilperin, Juliet, and Dan Morgan. 2001. Something borrowed, something blue: Memo enlists lobbyists to trade white collars for hard hats at GOP tax cut rally. Washington Post, March 9.
FactCheck.org. 2004. New and recycled distortions at final presidential debate: Bush claims most of his tax cuts went to low- and middle-income persons. Kerry says Pell Grants were cut. Don't believe either. October 14. http://www.factcheck.org/article281.html.
Fenno, Richard F., Jr. 1977. US House members in their constituencies. American Political Science Review 71 (3): 883–917.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, John, and James Kuklinski. 1990. Information and democratic processes. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Fiorina, Morris P. 2001. Keystone reconsidered. In Congress reconsidered, ed. L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer, 141–63. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Friedman, Joel, Richard Kogan, and Robert Greenstein. 2001. New tax-cut law ultimately costs as much as Bush plan: Gimmicks used to camouflage $4.1 trillion cost in second decade. Washington, DC: Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. http://www.cbpp.org/5-26-01tax.htm.
Gale, William G., and Peter R. Orszag. 2003. Sunsets in the tax code. Tax Notes, June 9, 1553–61.
Gale, William G., Peter R. Orszag, and Isaac Shapiro. 2004. Distributional effects of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and their financing. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution and Tax Policy Center. http://www.brook.edu/views/papers/gale/20040603.htm.
Green, Donald P., and Ian Shapiro. 1994. Pathologies of rational choice theory: A critique of applications in political science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Greenstein, Robert, Richard Kogan, and Joel Friedman. 2003. New tax cut law uses gimmicks to mask costs. Washington DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. http://www.cbpp.org/5-22-03tax.htm.
Hacker, Jacob S. 2002. The divided welfare state: The battle over public and private social benefits in the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hansen, John Mark. 1998. Individuals, institutions, and public preferences over public finance. American Political Science Review 92 (3): 513–31.Google Scholar
Inskeep, Steve. 2003. Tax bill Congress passed this week. National Public Radio, May 24.
Iyengar, Shanto. 1990. Shortcuts to political knowledge: Selective attention and the accessibility bias. In Information and democratic processes, ed. John A. Ferejohn and James H. Kuklinski, 160–85. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.
Jacobs, Lawrence, and Robert Shapiro. 2000. Politicians don't pander: Political manipulation and the loss of democratic responsiveness. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Krehbiel, Keith. 1998. Pivotal politics: A theory of US lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Krugman, Paul. 2001. Bad heir day. New York Times, May 30.
Krugman, Paul. 2003. The tax-cut con. New York Times Magazine, September 14, 54–62.
Lindberg, Tod. 2003. The Bush tax-cut record. Washington Times, June 10. http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030609-104541-6263r.htm.
Lindblom, Charles E. 1977. Politics and markets: The world's political economic systems. New York: Basic Books.
Lukes, Steven. 1974. Power: A radical view. New York: Macmillan.
Lupia, Arthur, and Mathew D. McCubbins. 1998. The democratic dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lupia, Arthur, Mathew D. McCubbins, and Samuel L. Popkin, eds. 2000. Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
MacKuen, Michael B., Robert S. Erikson, and James A. Stimson. 2002. The macro polity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayhew, David R. 1974. Congress: The electoral connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.
McCarty, Nolan, Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal. 1997. Income redistribution and the realignment of American politics. Washington DC: AEI Press.
Nagourney, Adam, and Janet Elder. 2004. Americans show clear concerns on Bush agenda. New York Times. November 23.
National Public Radio/Kaiser Family Foundation/Kennedy School of Government. 2003. National survey of Americans' views on taxes [February 5–March 17, 2003]. April. http://www.npr.org/news/specials/polls/taxes2003/20030415_taxes_survey.pdf. For a summary of the results, see http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/loader.cfm?url≠commonspot/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=14296.
Office of Management and Budget. 2004. Historical tables: Budget of the United States government Fiscal Year 2005. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. http://a255.g.akamaitech.net/7/255/2422/02feb20041242/www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/pdf/hist.pdf.
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Orszag, Peter R. 2001. The Bush tax cut is now about the same size as the Reagan tax cuts. Washington DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. http://www.cbpp.org/4-19-01tax.htm.
Page, Benjamin, and Robert Shapiro. 1992. The rational public: Fifty years of trends in Americans' policy preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pierson, Paul. 1994. Dismantling the welfare state? Reagan, Thatcher, and the politics of retrenchment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Pierson, Paul. 2001. The problem of democratic control in an age of big government. In Politics at the turn of the century, ed. Arthur M. Melzer, Jerry Weinberger, and M. Richard Zinman, 140–61. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Rosenstone, Steven J., and John Mark Hansen. 1993. Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: MacMillan.
Schattschneider, E. E. 1960. The semi-sovereign people: a realist's view of democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Shapiro, Ian, and Mayling Birney. 2004. Death or taxes? The estate tax repeal and American democracy. Unpublished paper.
Shepsle, Kenneth, and Mark S. Boncheck. 1997. Analyzing politics: Rationality, behavior, and institutions. New York: W. W. Norton.
Skocpol, Theda. 2003. Diminished democracy: From membership to management in American civil life. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Sniderman, Paul M, Richard A. Brody, and Philip E. Tetlock. 1991. Reasoning and choice: Explorations in political psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stimson, James A., Michael B. MacKuen, and Robert S. Erikson. 1995. Dynamic representation. American Political Science Review 89 (3): 543–65.Google Scholar
Stonecash, Jeffrey M., and Andrew E. Milstein. 2001. Parties and taxes: The emergence of distributive divisions, 1950–2000. Paper read at the Midwest Political Science Association Meeting, Chicago, April.
Sullivan, Martin A. 2003. The decline and fall of distribution analysis. Tax Notes, June 27, 1869–73.
Suskind, Ron. 2004. The price of loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the education of Paul O'Neill. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Theriault, Sean M. 2004. Party polarization in Congress: Member replacement or member adaptation? Unpublished paper.
Van Houweling, Robert Parks. 2003. Legislators' personal policy preferences and partisan legislative organization. PhD diss., Harvard University.
Weaver, Kent. 1986. The politics of blame avoidance. Journal of Public Policy 6 (4): 371–98.Google Scholar
White House, Office of the Press Secretary. 2001a. Remarks of the president on tax cut plan. Washington, DC, February 5. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20010205.html.
White House, Office of the Press Secretary. 2001b. Remarks by the president in tax cut bill signing ceremony. Washington, DC. June 7. http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/tax-relief/.

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 120
Total number of PDF views: 474 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 27th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

62 Cited by
Hostname: page-component-898fc554b-5qzh9 Total loading time: 0.532 Render date: 2021-01-27T02:29:34.115Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Abandoning the Middle: The Bush Tax Cuts and the Limits of Democratic Control
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Abandoning the Middle: The Bush Tax Cuts and the Limits of Democratic Control
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Abandoning the Middle: The Bush Tax Cuts and the Limits of Democratic Control
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *