TY - JOUR
T1 - Public support for higher taxes on the wealthy
T2 - California’s proposition 30
AU - Tolbert, Caroline J.
AU - Witko, Christopher
AU - Wolbers, Cary
N1 - Funding Information:
The analysis employs data from the 2012 California Field Poll, which is a random sample computer-assisted telephone survey carried out by the Field Research Corporation. In regard to Proposition 30, the survey presented respondents with the following information: Proposition 30 is the Temporary Taxes to Fund Education, Guaranteed Local Public Safety Funding initiative. It increases taxes on earnings over $250,000 dollars for seven years and sales taxes by a AH cent for four years, to fund schools and guarantees public safety realignment funding. Fiscal impact: Increased state tax revenues through 2018–2019, averaging about 6 billion dollars annually over the next few years. Revenues available for funding state budget. In 2012–2013, planned spending reductions, primarily to education programs, would not occur. (D-Lab, n.d.) Respondents were then asked whether they would support or oppose Proposition 30. In the following analyses, this question serves as the dependent variable, where 1 indicates support for Proposition 30, and 0 indicates opposition or lack of an opinion. By preceding the question with an informational paragraph, we are able to determine support for Proposition 30 as if everyone had been paying enough attention to the policy debate to understand the content of the proposed initiatives. Given the campaign spending and press coverage, there was presumably a high degree of familiarity with Proposition 30’s basic provisions in the broader population. Similar coding and question wording was used to measure support for the counter initiative, Proposition 38 (see the 2012 California Field Poll). Because the outcome variables are binary, logistic regression is used in the statistical analysis.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 by the author; licensee Cogitatio (Lisbon, Portugal).
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - It has long been argued that growing inequality would lead to growing demands for redistribution, especially from less affluent individuals who would benefit most from redistribution. Yet, in many countries we have not seen tax increases and even when ballot initiatives allow individuals to directly vote to raise taxes on the wealthy they decline to do so. This raises the question of how economic self-interest shapes voting on tax proposals, and what factors may weaken the links between economic self-interest and tax policy preferences. In the U.S. context partisanship is a factor that has a major influence on attitudes about taxation. To explore how self-interest sometimes overcomes partisanship we take advantage of competing initiatives that were simultaneously on the ballot in California in 2012. California’s Proposition 30, a successful 2012 initiative, significantly increased taxes on the wealthy. By comparing voting on Proposition 30 to voting on Proposition 38, which would have raised taxes on nearly everyone, we observe that when tax hikes are focused only on the wealthy a substantial number of lower income Republicans (i.e., conservatives) defect from their party position opposing taxation. We identify these low-income Republicans as “populists.” Lower income Republicans are also less supportive of income tax increases on the lower and middle classes, and are more sensitive to income tax increases than sales tax increases. We argue that economic self-interest causes heterogeneity within the parties in terms of attitudes toward tax increases.
AB - It has long been argued that growing inequality would lead to growing demands for redistribution, especially from less affluent individuals who would benefit most from redistribution. Yet, in many countries we have not seen tax increases and even when ballot initiatives allow individuals to directly vote to raise taxes on the wealthy they decline to do so. This raises the question of how economic self-interest shapes voting on tax proposals, and what factors may weaken the links between economic self-interest and tax policy preferences. In the U.S. context partisanship is a factor that has a major influence on attitudes about taxation. To explore how self-interest sometimes overcomes partisanship we take advantage of competing initiatives that were simultaneously on the ballot in California in 2012. California’s Proposition 30, a successful 2012 initiative, significantly increased taxes on the wealthy. By comparing voting on Proposition 30 to voting on Proposition 38, which would have raised taxes on nearly everyone, we observe that when tax hikes are focused only on the wealthy a substantial number of lower income Republicans (i.e., conservatives) defect from their party position opposing taxation. We identify these low-income Republicans as “populists.” Lower income Republicans are also less supportive of income tax increases on the lower and middle classes, and are more sensitive to income tax increases than sales tax increases. We argue that economic self-interest causes heterogeneity within the parties in terms of attitudes toward tax increases.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070695414&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85070695414&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.17645/pag.v7i2.1915
DO - 10.17645/pag.v7i2.1915
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85070695414
SN - 2183-2463
VL - 7
SP - 351
EP - 364
JO - Politics and Governance
JF - Politics and Governance
IS - 2
ER -