Does Economic Inequality Depress Electoral Participation? Testing the Schattschneider Hypothesis

Abstract

Nearly a half-century ago, E.E. Schattschneider wrote that the high abstention and large differences between the rates of electoral participation of richer and poorer citizens found in the United States were caused by high levels of economic inequality. Despite increasing inequality and stagnant or declining voting rates since then, Schattschneider's hypothesis remains largely untested. This article takes advantage of the variation in inequality across states and over time to remedy this oversight. Using a multilevel analysis that combines aspects of state context with individual survey responses in 144 gubernatorial elections, it finds that citizens of states with greater income inequality are less likely to vote and that income inequality increases income bias in the electorate, lending empirical support to Schattschneider's argument.

Patterns of electoral behavior in marginal rural communes in Slovakia (case study from Eastern Slovakia)

“…In categories C1 and C5 it is strongly connected to the high support for SMER-SD and its mobilization effect and in C4 it is linked with higher general support for right-wing parties and for parties that did not reached the 5 % threshold at the national level. Results from parliamentary and presidential elections oppose conventional statements, that strong electoral participation is a structural trait of rural local democracy (Nevers, 2008) and proves hypothesis of Schattschneider (1960) or concept of Withdrawal (Rosenstone 1982) tested by Solt (2010) in which the poorer stay away from the elections because of the increase in inequality in the society. However, this hypothesis proved invalid, and the statement of Nevers (2008) relevant, when it comes to the communal elections.…”

Explaining Turnout Decline in Post-Communist Countries: The Impact of Migration

“…Other measures of socio-economic development related with VT are human development (positive) (Pacek et al, 2009) and economic inequality (negative) (Solt, 2010). Other studies (Stockemer and Scruggs, 2012) failed to find a connection between income inequality and VT.…”

Inequality, Bi-Polarization and Mobility of Urban Infrastructure Investment in China’s Urban System

“…(1) Inequality is the most common unbalance issue and stands for the degree of average difference between different groups. Economically, inequality is an obstacle to sustainable growth [70][71][72], socially, it undermines social stability [73], politically, it depresses popular participation in public benefit activities [74], environmentally, it encourages poor people to overuse natural resources, which results in serious pollution and biodiversity loss [75]. (2) Bi-polarization represents the differences between two groups in two poles.…”