Events

The Density Paradox: How Rising Geographic Inequality Is Reshaping American Democracy
Rising geographic inequality and increasing place-based party polarization are reshaping American democracy. Central to this transformation is what my coauthor Paul Pierson and I call the “Density Paradox.” In the urban-oriented knowledge economy, density is very good for productivity and growth, which is why dense metro agglomerations are pulling away from non-metro areas across the postindustrial world. However, in territorial electoral systems—of which the United States is a particularly extreme case—density is very bad for representation. In the American framework, the Republican Party benefits greatly from its dispersed non-metro electorate, while Democrats struggle to translate their metro-based electoral majorities into governing power, despite the outsized economic importance of the places they represent. In this talk, I will examine how the Density Paradox is reshaping America’s two-party system. In particular, I will examine how the parties have had to refashion their appeals to build geographically proximate majorities that include both the prosperous and the economically struggling. As Paul and I have argued, the density paradox is fueling the Republican Party’s turn toward a particular U.S. form of right-wing populism. Less examined — and hence my major focus — is its effect on the Democratic Party. As geography has gradually replaced income as the driver of party identification, how have Democratic leaders responded? Have they followed the GOP in shifting from economic to cultural appeals, as suggested by Piketty’s critique of “Brahmin left parties”? Drawing on a range of evidence, we find that the party’s move in this direction has been limited to date. Interest cleavages within the party’s new metro-based coalition are indeed acute. Yet Democrats have managed them less by shifting to cultural issues than by carefully curating their economic agenda in order to minimize intra-coalitional conflict. The parties’ asymmetric responses reflect not only the different ways they are affected by the Density Paradox, but also the different character of their organized coalitions, as well as key features of the U.S. case that have limited the trade-offs for the Democratic Party of advancing broad (and costly) economic programs.

Jacob S. Hacker is Stanley Resor Professor of Political Science at Yale University. A regular media commentator and policy adviser, he is the author or co-author of five books, numerous journal articles, and a wide range of popular writings on American politics and public policy. His most recent book, written with Paul Pierson, is American Amnesia: How the War on Government Led Us to Forget What Made America Prosper — a New York Times Book Review Editor’s Choice and a best business book of 2016 according to the management magazine Strategy + Business. Previously, the two wrote the New York Times bestseller Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class. Professor Hacker is known for his research and writings regarding health policy, especially his development of the so-called public option. He is also a member of the OECD’s High-Level Expert Group on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. He was recently elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.