IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v96y2002i03p565-574_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Self-Interest, Social Security, and the Distinctive Participation Patterns of Senior Citizens

Author

Listed:
  • CAMPBELL, ANDREA LOUISE

Abstract

Decades of participation research show that political activity increases with income, but the participation of senior citizens specifically with regard to Social Security poses an exception to this pattern. Social Security-oriented participation decreases as income rises, in part because lower-income seniors are more dependent on the program. The negative income-participation gradient is especially pronounced for letter writing about the program, but even Social Security-related voting and contributing are less common among higher-income seniors. This is an instance in which self-interest is highly influential: Those who are more dependent are more active. It is also an example of lower-class mobilization with regard to an economic issue, something quite unusual in the United States.

Suggested Citation

  • Campbell, Andrea Louise, 2002. "Self-Interest, Social Security, and the Distinctive Participation Patterns of Senior Citizens," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(3), pages 565-574, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:96:y:2002:i:03:p:565-574_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055402000333/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Levin-Waldman, Oren M., 2013. "Income, civic participation and achieving greater democracy," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 83-92.
    2. Marques, Marcelo, 2021. "How do policy instruments generate new ones? Analysing policy instruments feedback and interaction in educational research in England, 1986-2014," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    3. Larry M. Bartels & Henry E. Brady, 2003. "Economic Behavior in Political Context," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 156-161, May.
    4. repec:lib:00johs:v:18:y:2022:i:1:p:18-28 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Zhang, Muyang & Zhou, Guangsu & Fan, Gang, 2020. "Political Control and Economic Inequality: Evidence from Chinese Cities," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    6. Jonas Meckling, 2019. "Governing renewables: Policy feedback in a global energy transition," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 37(2), pages 317-338, March.
    7. Jingjing Zeng & Meng Yuan & Richard Feiock, 2019. "What Drives People to Complain about Environmental Issues? An Analysis Based on Panel Data Crossing Provinces of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    8. Alber, Jens & Kohler, Ulrich, 2008. "The inequality of electoral participation in Europe and America and the politically integrative functions of the welfare state," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Inequality and Social Integration SP I 2008-202, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    9. R. Battaglio & Jerome Legge, 2008. "Citizen Support for Hospital Privatization: A Hierarchical Cross-National Analysis," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 17-36, March.
    10. Ganslmeier, Michael, 2023. "Are Campaign Promises Effective?," EconStor Preprints 274069, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    11. Matteo Bassi, 2008. "I Will Survive: Capital Taxation, Voter Turnout and Time Inconsistency," CSEF Working Papers 206, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    12. Jason B. Cook, 2019. "Government Privatization and Political Participation: The Case of Charter Schools," Working Paper 6651, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    13. Matthew Palm & Susan Handy, 2018. "Sustainable transportation at the ballot box: a disaggregate analysis of the relative importance of user travel mode, attitudes and self-interest," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 121-141, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:96:y:2002:i:03:p:565-574_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.