← ireadpaper · 顶刊中的公共政策研究

“补偿受损者?”经济政策与美国政党阵营重组的起源

“Compensate the Losers?” Economic Policy and the Origins of U.S. Partisan Realignment
Quarterly Journal of Economics · 2026 · Ilyana Kuziemko、Nicolas Longuet-Marx、Suresh Naidu

中文摘要

我们认为,民主党在经济政策上的演变有助于解释按教育程度划分的政党阵营重组。首先,我们记录到,受教育程度较高的美国人对“预分配”政策(例如就业保障、提高最低工资、保护主义和强化工会)的反对程度相对更高,而再分配(税收与转移支付)态度的教育梯度接近于零。自20世纪40年代以来,这些关系基本保持不变。其次,我们将政治人物和捐款者视为关键的政党行动者,表明民主党自20世纪70年代以来已逐渐偏离预分配政策。自20世纪70年代以来,民主党籍众议院议长提出的预分配法案数量减少了一半。工会——传统上推动预分配政策的游说力量——在20世纪70年代促进企业政治行动委员会(PAC)捐款的立法出台后,其在民主党所获PAC捐款中的占比从1968年的90%降至1980年的40%。自1980年起,与共和党相比,民主党日益依赖受教育程度较高的捐款者所提供的个人捐款。我们表明,对企业PAC和受教育程度较高捐款者依赖程度的上升,是由一个自称“新民主党人”的派别兴起所驱动的,该派别在预分配和社会议题上尤为保守。最后,我们追踪了选民对民主党这些变化的反应。受教育程度较低的美国人在长期充当民主党选民基础后,于20世纪70年代开始离开该党。我们还表明,在20世纪70年代至90年代这一关键转型期,无论是在调查问题中还是在实际的国会选举中,新民主党候选人在受教育程度较高的选民中均比其他民主党候选人表现更好。由于新民主党人在社会议题上比其他民主党人更为保守,他们在受教育程度较高选民中的成功表明,仅凭社会议题无法解释教育维度上的政党阵营重组。

Abstract

Abstract We argue that the Democratic Party’s evolution on economic policy helps explain partisan realignment by education. First, we document that educated Americans differentially oppose “predistribution” (e.g., job guarantees, higher minimum wages, protectionism, and stronger unions), while the educational gradient for redistribution (taxes and transfers) is close to zero. These relationships have been largely unchanged since the 1940s. Second, focusing on politicians and donors as key party actors, we show that the Democratic Party has moved away from predistribution since the 1970s. The number of predistribution bills introduced by Democratic House Speakers has declined by half since the 1970s. Unions—the traditional lobbying force for predistribution—see their share of Democratic Party PAC donations decline from 90% to 40% from 1968 to 1980, following 1970s legislation that facilitated corporate PAC donations. From 1980 onward, the Democrats rely increasingly on individual contributions from educated donors relative to the Republicans. We show the increased reliance on corporate PACs and educated donors is driven by the rise of a self-described “New Democrat’’ faction particularly conservative on predistribution and social issues. Finally, we trace the reaction of voters to these changes in the Democratic Party. Less-educated Americans begin to leave the party in the 1970s, after decades of serving as its base. We also show that in the crucial transition period of the 1970s through 1990s, New Democrat candidates outperform other Democrats among more-educated voters in both survey questions and actual Congressional elections. As the New Democrats are more socially conservative than other Democrats, their success with educated voters suggests that social issues alone cannot explain educational realignment.
在 ireadpaper 查看全部 →