160 likes | 169 Vues
This study explores the money ecosystem of US politics, examining the network and organizational dimensions. It investigates regional inequalities, per capita contributions in different zip codes, population density, market niches, and collective action. The study also highlights the utilization of networks to mobilize people and the existence of a critical mass. It delves into political-money networks and the prominence of certain pairs in cities like Boston, Washington DC, Los Angeles, and NYC. The organizational dimension, bias towards mobilizing money, and the influence of high population density areas are also discussed. The study explores the impact of the internet, digging deeper into the income hierarchy, the role of Citizens United, and the importance of different types of networks and networking behavior.
E N D
Detecting the money networks of US politics… David Lazer Northeastern University
The money ecosystem of US politics • The network and organizational dimensions
Geography of money From Onnela and Lazer (2009)
Enormous regional inequalities… • Per capita contributions, zip 66508 (Marshall KS) for 1999-2010: • Per capita contributions, zip 10013 (New York City) for 1999-2010: • $4.71 • $178.48
Population density, market niches, and collective action • If you can’t find a niche in Manhattan, you can’t find it anywhere… • The potential of making contributions that are “noticed” • The utilization of networks to mobilize people • The existence of a critical mass for almost anything (who wants a fundraising party with 3 people?)
The Political-Money networks From Ruths and Lazer (2009)
Prominent pairs… • Boston • Ryan Vincent & Carla Meyer - board members • Washington DC • Ed Rogers & Lanny Griffith - partners in lobbying firm • Los Angeles • Spielberg & Katzenberg - film producers • NYC • Debra Black & Judith Hannan - board members
Population density of affluent… • A key predictor of per capita contributions is # of affluent per square mile
Bottom line… • Median voter vs median dollar… • Heavy bias toward need to “harvest money” from geographically concentrated top few percent • Corporation as setting to mobilize money • Democratic bias, because of Democratic tilt of high population density areas
Where now? • The Internet and Obama ’08: • the irrelevance of geography? • digging deeper into the income hierarchy? • Citizens United • The 1% (or so) vs the .0001% • The importance of very different types of networks and networking behavior