Responsiveness in an Era of Inequality

• Published date: 01 September 2013
• DOI: 10.1177/1065912912459567
• Author: Thomas J. Hayes
• Date: 01 September 2013
• Subject Matter: Articles

Political Research Quarterly

66(3) 585 –599

© 2012 University of Utah

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1065912912459567

prq.sagepub.com

Regular Article

The growth in wealth and income inequality is one of the

most pressing problems currently facing American soci-

ety. Although wealth and income inequality has grown in

the post–World War II era, the process has accelerated in

recent decades. Since the 1980s, the growth in income

and wealth among the top 5 percent has increased sub-

stantially, yet the other 95 percent have seen little or no

increase (Piketty and Saez 2003). Researchers who have

studied growing inequality have even labeled the recent

era a “New Gilded Age” (Bartels 2008). With the growth

in income and wealth inequality in America since the

late 1960s, scholars, policymakers, and advocates for

disadvantaged persons are increasingly concerned that

inequality among citizens could be a mounting threat, as

disparities in economic inequality often contribute to

unequal political outcomes (Task Force on Inequality

and American Democracy 2004). Although some

research has been done investigating the causes and con-

sequences of wealth inequality (e.g., Bartels 2008;

Gilens 2005; see also Keister and Moller 2000 for a

review), very little has been done to investigate how the

most recent increase in inequality affects representation

in the American political system. The fact that little has

been done is surprising, given that the idea that all citi-

zens are to be treated equally is central to most standard

theories of democracy. Although liberty and popular sov-

ereignty also constitute essential aspects of republican

democracy, equality among citizens remains a chief con-

cern for democratic theorists (e.g., Dahl 1956).

One way to evaluate how wealth inequality affects

American democracy is to examine the degree to which the

government responds equally (or unequally) to citizens

of different economic situations. The concept of repre-

sentation has become central to contemporary demo-

cratic theory. Although an essentially modern concept,

representation has come to mean popular representation

and is now linked with self-government (Pitkin 1967). In

the representation literature, there is a considerable focus

on respon siveness—the level of correspondence between

constituency preferences and a legislator’s behavior (e.g.,

Achen 1978; Miller and Stokes 1963).

This article contributes to recent work of scholars

investigating the causes and consequences of unequal rep-

resentation (e.g., Bartels 2008). Using data from the 2004

National Annenberg Election Survey (NAES), I examine

the responsiveness of Senators to different economic

groups across a range of issues for the 107th through 111th

Congresses.1 This time period allows me to examine

responsiveness under a broad variety of institutional cir-

cumstances. These circumstances matter because they

might affect the inequality that occurs through mecha-

nisms like differences in party control of Congress, the

459567PRQXXX10.1177/1065912912

459567Political Research QuarterlyHayes

1Trinity University, San Antonio, TX, USA

Corresponding Author:

Thomas J. Hayes, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science,

University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.

Email: thomas.hayes@uconn.edu

Responsiveness in an Era of Inequality:

The Case of the U.S. Senate

Thomas J. Hayes1

Abstract

To what extent do members of Congress respond unequally to people in different economic situations? How does

partisan control of the agenda change the way in which Senators respond to the poor? Using data from the 2004

National Annenberg Election Survey, and multiple roll call votes, I examine Senate responsiveness for the 107th

through 111th Congresses. The results show consistent responsiveness toward upper income constituents. Moreover,

Republicans are more responsive than Democrats to middle-income constituents in the 109th Congress, and a case

study of the 107th Senate reveals that responsiveness toward the wealthy increases once Democrats take control of

the chamber.

Keywords

representation, inequality, senate, responsiveness