99% of rich people vote, 49% of poor people do

[ttt]

There are tons of charts in the link, so I'm only C&Ping part of the article. You should really click and read it at the link. 

www.vox.com/2014/10/24/7055091/class-and-turnout

Does it matter that the wealthy turnout to vote at a rate of almost 99% while those making below $10,000 vote at a rate of 49%? It sure seems like it would, but for a long time many political scientists and journalists believed it didn't. In their seminal 1980 study on the question (using data from 1972) Raymond Wolfinger and Steven Rosenstone argued that, "voters are virtually a carbon copy of the citizen population." In a 1999 study, Wolfinger and Benjamin Highton find a slightly larger gap between voters and nonvoters, but still conclude, "non-voters appear well represented by those who vote."

This argument has been largely assimilated by pundits and also non-voters, 59% of whom believe "nothing ever gets done," and 41% of whom say "my vote doesn't make a difference anyway."

But more recent research suggests that the logic of wealth voters is sound — and that if the poor and middle class turned out at a higher rate, policy would shift leftward on economic policy. The most important study on the question is by Jan Leighley and Jonathan Nagler. They revisit the Wolfinger/Rosenstone thesis and find that, in fact, non-voters are not, "a carbon copy" of the voting electorate as previously assumed. They find that, "notable demographic, economic, and political changes that have occurred in the U.S. since Wolfinger and Rosenstone's classic statement [their 1980 book, "Who Votes"]." The most important difference that Leighley and Nagler find is that:

After 1972, voters and non-voters differ significantly on most issues relating to the role of government in redistributive policies. In addition to these differences being evident in nearly every election since 1972, we also note that the nature of the electoral bias is clear as well: voters are substantially more conservative than non-voters on class-based issues.

That is, after the New Deal consensus eroded, policy views became more polarized along class lines and the class-skewed nature of the electorate began to matter considerably. Non-voters skew left on a variety of issues:

[pamela]

What turnout are they measuring that is anywhere near that high? But I do believe the disparity.

[origami]

That's interesting but it didn't mention (or I missed it because I skimmed) that the population is not distributed evenly across the income brackets. I don't know what % falls in each bracket but 14.5% live in poverty, however that is defined, and more would be low income, even if they aren't in poverty. So in absolute numbers there may still be more voters on the lower end vs the higher end. I'm sure the absolute numbers vary a lot by district.

[irishbride2]

Oct 24, 2014 21:13:17 GMT -5 origami said:

That's interesting but it didn't mention (or I missed it because I skimmed) that the population is not distributed evenly across the income brackets. I don't know what % falls in each bracket but 14.5% live in poverty, however that is defined, and more would be low income, even if they aren't in poverty. So in absolute numbers there may still be more voters on the lower end vs the higher end. I'm sure the absolute numbers vary a lot by district.

This was my first thought. I mean heck if we are talking about the top 1%, that's less than 1% of he population are wealthy voters.

[ttt]

[irishbride2]

Ok so the headline was talking about the 1%

Still an issue as it's a trend overall.

[ttt]

Oct 25, 2014 8:56:29 GMT -5 irishbride2 said:

Ok so the headline was talking about the 1%

Still an issue as it's a trend overall.

Well the differences are most stark between the top and the bottom, but yeah it's interesting to look at the whole trend. 

[penguingrrl]

I wonder how much of this has to do with voter education and access. I know that the polls are open from 7a-8p where I am, but I could see how someone who works double shifts to make ends meet wouldn't make it and might not be aware that they/how can get an absentee ballot.

Obviously many people simply don't care enough or don't feel that their vote matters, but I do wonder whether the message is adequately put out about getting to the polls or how easy it is to get an absentee ballot.