Biases at the Ballot Box: How Multiple Forms of Voter Discrimination Impede the Descriptive and Substantive Representation of Ethnic Minority Groups

Nicole S Martin,Scott Blinder

doi:10.1007/s11109-020-09596-4

Nicole S Martin, Scott Blinder

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09596-4

Copy DOI

Abstract

Research shows that ethnic minority candidates often face an electoral penalty at the ballot box. In this study, we argue that this penalty depends on both candidate and voter characteristics, and that pro-minority policy positions incur a greater penalty than a candidate’s ethnic background itself. Using a conjoint experiment embedded in a panel study of British voters, we investigate the relative contributions of candidate ethnicity, policy positions, affirmative action, and voter attitudes to this electoral penalty. We find that although Pakistani (Muslim) candidates are penalized directly for their ethnicity, black Caribbean candidates receive on average the same levels of support as white British ones. However, black Caribbean candidates suffer conditional discrimination where they are penalized if they express support for pro-minority policies, and all candidates are penalized for having been selected through an affirmative action initiative. We also find that some white British voters are more inclined to support a black Caribbean candidate than a white British one, all else being equal. These voters (one quarter of our sample) have cosmopolitan views on immigration, and a strong commitment to anti-prejudice norms. However, despite efforts across parties to increase the ethnic diversity of candidates for office, many voters’ preferences continue to pose barriers toward descriptive and substantive representation of ethnic minority groups.

Highlights

Political underrepresentation of ethnic minorities is a significant problem in many rich and diverse democratic nations
We explore the possibility of conditional discrimination: do voters impose additional penalties on pro-minority candidates if the candidate herself has a minority group identity? we address the opposite end of the spectrum of prejudice
This echoes the analysis of Kalkan et al (2018), who find in a vignette experiment that Americans with positive views of cultural outgroups are more likely to support a Muslim candidate than a baseline candidate of non-specified religion or ethnicity

Summary

Introduction

Political underrepresentation of ethnic minorities is a significant problem in many rich and diverse democratic nations. In the US case, a substantial proportion of white voters seem to fear the consequences of descriptive representation of minority groups (Parker and Barreto 2014), whilst some working class white Americans and Britons explicitly characterize themselves as minority group members and believe that they face discrimination and lack representation (Gest 2016) For such individuals, the racial or ethnic identity of their representatives may be important symbolically (Tate 2001). If minority candidates promise to promote minority groups’ interests, white voters may assess a conditional ethnic penalty above and beyond what a white candidate would face for taking an unpopular policy position We test these three major hypotheses, along with several extensions described below, in the context of Great Britain, and in the run up to the 2017 general election, which was called three years early and initially centered the Brexit divide (Cowley and Kavanagh 2018). An experimental test is needed to determine whether observational evidence of electoral discrimination is substantiated, and to explore whether any discrimination we find is focused on descriptive or substantive representation

Study Design

Findings

Discussion