Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 36
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Baker, Anne E. 2016. Getting Short-Changed? The Impact of Outside Money on District Representation*. Social Science Quarterly,

    Barber, Michael J. 2016. Representing the Preferences of Donors, Partisans, and Voters in the US Senate. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 80, Issue. S1, p. 225.

    Boatright, Robert G Malbin, Michael J and Glavin, Brendan 2016. Independent expenditures in congressional primaries after Citizens United: Implications for interest groups, incumbents and political parties. Interest Groups & Advocacy,

    Carbone, June and Cahn, Naomi 2016. Special Issue: Feminist Legal Theory.

    Carter, Jeff and Palmer, Glenn 2016. Regime Type and Interstate War Finance. Foreign Policy Analysis, p. orw021.

    Duca, John V. and Saving, Jason L. 2016. INCOME INEQUALITY, MEDIA FRAGMENTATION, AND INCREASED POLITICAL POLARIZATION. Contemporary Economic Policy,

    Fairbrother, Malcolm 2016. Externalities: why environmental sociology should bring them in. Environmental Sociology, p. 1.

    Franko, William W. Kelly, Nathan J. and Witko, Christopher 2016. Class Bias in Voter Turnout, Representation, and Income Inequality. Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 14, Issue. 02, p. 351.

    Kalla, Joshua L. and Broockman, David E. 2016. Campaign Contributions Facilitate Access to Congressional Officials: A Randomized Field Experiment. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 60, Issue. 3, p. 545.

    Mendelberg, Tali McCabe, Katherine T. and Thal, Adam 2016. College Socialization and the Economic Views of Affluent Americans. American Journal of Political Science,

    Mitchell, Joshua L. 2016. Examining media markets’ influence on the diffusion of antismoking legislation in US counties. Local Government Studies, Vol. 42, Issue. 5, p. 665.

    Sherman, Rachel 2016. Conflicted cultivation: Parenting, privilege, and moral worth in wealthy New York families. American Journal of Cultural Sociology,

    Temin, Peter 2016. The American Dual Economy. International Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 45, Issue. 2, p. 85.

    Wai, Jonathan and Lincoln, David 2016. Investigating the right tail of wealth: Education, cognitive ability, giving, network power, gender, ethnicity, leadership, and other characteristics. Intelligence, Vol. 54, p. 1.

    Zucker, Ross 2016. What type of political system is the US? Forthcoming in theJournal of Political Power. Journal of Political Power, Vol. 9, Issue. 1, p. 5.

    Barnes, L. 2015. The size and shape of government: preferences over redistributive tax policy. Socio-Economic Review, Vol. 13, Issue. 1, p. 55.

    Carter, Jeff and Palmer, Glenn 2015. Keeping the Schools Open While the Troops are Away: Regime Type, Interstate War, and Government Spending. International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 59, Issue. 1, p. 145.

    De Vogli, Roberto and Owusu, Jocelynn T. 2015. The causes and health effects of the Great Recession: from neoliberalism to ‘healthy de-growth’. Critical Public Health, Vol. 25, Issue. 1, p. 15.

    Essletzbichler, Jürgen 2015. The top 1% in U.S. metropolitan areas. Applied Geography, Vol. 61, p. 35.

    Gilens, Martin 2015. The Insufficiency of “Democracy by Coincidence”: A Response to Peter K. Enns. Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 13, Issue. 04, p. 1065.


Democracy and the Policy Preferences of Wealthy Americans

  • Benjamin I. Page (a1), Larry M. Bartels (a2) and Jason Seawright (a3)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 March 2013

It is important to know what wealthy Americans seek from politics and how (if at all) their policy preferences differ from those of other citizens. There can be little doubt that the wealthy exert more political influence than the less affluent do. If they tend to get their way in some areas of public policy, and if they have policy preferences that differ significantly from those of most Americans, the results could be troubling for democratic policy making. Recent evidence indicates that “affluent” Americans in the top fifth of the income distribution are socially more liberal but economically more conservative than others. But until now there has been little systematic evidence about the truly wealthy, such as the top 1 percent. We report the results of a pilot study of the political views and activities of the top 1 percent or so of US wealth-holders. We find that they are extremely active politically and that they are much more conservative than the American public as a whole with respect to important policies concerning taxation, economic regulation, and especially social welfare programs. Variation within this wealthy group suggests that the top one-tenth of 1 percent of wealth-holders (people with $40 million or more in net worth) may tend to hold still more conservative views that are even more distinct from those of the general public. We suggest that these distinctive policy preferences may help account for why certain public policies in the United States appear to deviate from what the majority of US citizens wants the government to do. If this is so, it raises serious issues for democratic theory.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Anthony B. Atkinson , Thomas Piketty, and Emmanuel Saez. 2011. “Top Incomes in the Long Run of History.” Journal of Economic Literature 49: 371.

Rebecca M. Blank 1997. It Takes a Nation: A New Agenda for Fighting Poverty. New York: Russell Sage Foundation and Princeton University Press.

Fred Block . 2007. “Understanding the Diverging Trajectories of the United States and Western Europe: A Neo-Polanyian Analysis.” Politics & Society 35(1): 333.

Martin Gilens . 2005. “Inequality and Democratic Responsiveness.” Public Opinion Quarterly 69: 778–96.

Lane Kenworthy , and Jonas Pontusson. 2005. “Rising Inequality and the Politics of Redistribution in Affluent Countries.” Perspectives on Politics 3(3): 449471.

John P. McCormick 2011. Machiavellian Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Benjamin I. Page , with Marshall M. Bouton. 2006. The Foreign Policy Disconnect: What Americans Want from Our Leaders but Don't Get. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Benjamin I. Page , and Lawrence R. Jacobs. 2009. Class War? What Americans Really Think about Economic Inequality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Benjamin I. Page , and Robert Y. Shapiro. 1992. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans' Policy Preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Thomas Piketty , and Emmanuel Saez. 2003. “Income Inequality in the United States, 1913–1998.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 118(1): 139. Updates at

Peter A. Swenson 2002. Capitalists against Markets: The Making of Labor Markets and Welfare States in the United States and Sweden. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jeffrey A. Winters 2011. Oligarchy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Jeffrey A. Winters , and Benjamin I. Page. 2009. “Oligarchy in the United States?Perspectives on Politics 7(4): 731–51.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Perspectives on Politics
  • ISSN: 1537-5927
  • EISSN: 1541-0986
  • URL: /core/journals/perspectives-on-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *