Research
Peer-Reviewed Articles
Economic Self-Interest and Support for Redistribution: New Evidence Using Election Results Data
With Jieun Lee, Ben Newman, and G. Agustin Markarian. American Political Science Review. 2026. FirstView: 1-12.
PDF | Online version | Replication data
Abstract
A formidable corpus of scholarship explores the role of economic self-interest in shaping public support for redistribution. One striking feature of this literature is its near exclusive reliance on reported preferences in surveys, with little-to-no research analyzing revealed preferences in the form of actual voting on redistribution. Leveraging 8 redistributive ballot initiatives across 6 American states and a total of N=73,053 observations of revealed support for redistribution, we uncover consistent evidence that the economic standing of precinct voters is systematically related to their support for redistribution. We find that lower to upper-middle income precincts are each significantly more supportive of redistribution than upper income precincts, with pronounced decreases in support associated with the increasing prevalence of high-income households subject to proposed tax increases. Finally, we observe the largest class differential in support for redistribution in more heavily Republican precincts.
When Cues Collide: Partisan Signals and the Dynamics of Ethnic Voting in Nonpartisan Local Elections
Urban Affairs Review 0(0): 1–35. (OnlineFirst, 2026)
PDF | Online version | Replication data
Abstract
Voters often use candidate ethnicity as a shortcut in low-information elections, but partisan cues might shift the weight of ethnic signals. This article examines how partisan information moderates the relationship between co-ethnicity and vote choice in 103 multiethnic, nonpartisan mayoral elections in California (2010–2021). Using precinct-level election returns and voter registration data, I find that Latino candidates receive greater support as the share of Latino registrants in a precinct increases — but this relationship changes when party information is revealed. When facing a known non-Latino Democrat, Latino candidates receive less support than their nonpartisan counterparts; when facing a known non-Latino Republican, they gain support. These effects are strongest in precincts with more Latino Democrats. The findings highlight how party cues reshape ethnic voting, even without formal partisan labels.
Papers in Progress
Benefit or Backlash? Examining the Consequences of Expanding Definitions of Prejudice
With Clayton Becker, Josh Goetz, Ananya Hariharan, Emily Ortiz, and Connor Warshauer. Under review.
Most Recent Version | Blog Post
Abstract
Definitions of prejudice have expanded in recent political discourse, yet the downstream consequences remain unclear. This paper develops a theory of backlash to expanding definitions, arguing that when individuals encounter allegations they feel are exaggerated or false, they become more skeptical of subsequent allegations and less concerned about the relevant form of prejudice. We test this in the context of antisemitism in the U.S., using an original survey experiment (N = 5,110) exposing respondents to an allegation labeling a pro-Palestinian protest as antisemitic. Exposure reduces belief in the validity of a subsequent allegation and lowers assessments of antisemitism’s severity in society, supporting a backlash interpretation. These effects appear driven largely by a motivated reasoning process aimed at protecting moral self-image. While our empirical focus is antisemitism, the theory and results are broadly significant for scholars of racism and practitioners engaged in definitional debates over what constitutes prejudice.
How Responsive is US Municipal Fiscal Policy to Residents’ Partisanship Across Time and Even in Small Towns?
With Adam Dynes and Graham Straus. Working paper.
