The occasion of America’s midterm elections last week has stimulated yet another round of discussion as to what ails the nation’s democracy.
The ground was well covered on the weekend by Fairfax’s United States correspondent Nick O’Malley, in an account that encompassed gerrymandering, voter suppression and mounting public apathy.
Overarching these issues is an increasing ideological polarisation among that part of the American public that can still be relied upon to participate in the electoral process.
With remarkable clarity, a study by a non-partisan Washington DC think tank, the Pew Research Centre, shows how those who identify as Democrats and Republicans have increasingly coalesced around distinct sets of liberal and conservative positions respectively across a range of social and economic issues.
This has fed into a vicious cycle in which the parties campaign negatively to rouse the anger of those on their own side of the ideological fence, but in doing so alienate those in the centre. The response of the latter has been to tune out of the entire process — which in turn makes them ever less relevant to the calculations of the campaign strategists.
Writing from an Australian perspective, O’Malley attributes the malaise of American democracy in part to voluntary voting, which certainly stands to reason to the extent that the well has been poisoned by the parties’ imperative to “mobilise the base”.
Does it follow though that our system of compulsory voting has created what Prime Minister Tony Abbott might call a “kinder and gentler polity”? Few who have closely observed our political debate over the past few years would think so.
It might be that ideological polarisation is instead being driven by phenomena common to both countries. An obvious culprit is the changing landscape of the media, both with respect to social media, which ideologues use to wall themselves off from contrary voices (creating what Pew Research describes as “ideological silos”), and the conventional news media, which is certainly becoming more partisan in the United States and is arguably doing so in Australia as well.
Thanks to the Australian National University’s Australian election study series, a regular post-election survey very much like those conducted by the Pew Research Centre, we need not die wondering.
The Pew Research approach to measuring ideological positioning involved identifying ten survey questions on issues generally understood to entail distinct conservative and liberal positions. Reflecting this, I have identified ten questions from the Australian Election Study for which the wording has gone unchanged since 1993, roughly coinciding with the 1994 starting point of the Pew Research study. Five relate to economic issues, the rest to social questions and foreign policy.
As the voluntary voting thesis leads us to expect, Australia shows up negative when the polarisation test is replicated for those who identify as supporters of Labor or the Coalition. The key indicator here is the Cronbach’s alpha measure featured in the Pew Research study, which condenses the tendency of answers to conform to one or another pattern into a single statistic.
In the Pew Research study, this shoots up from 0.50 in 1994 to 0.72 in 2014, with almost the entirety of the shift occurring after 2004. But when applied to the Australian Election Study, a score of 0.54 in 1993 only increases to 0.59 in 2013. While these are respectively the lowest and the highest scores produced across the eight election surveys, the narrowness of the range is quite a bit more striking than any discernible trend from one election to the next.
However, there is one trend that does emerge forcefully from the Australian data, and it’s not one you hear mentioned too often. Put simply, the Australian electorate appears to have moved solidly to the Left.
The chart below, which replicates one from the Pew Research study, shows this trend to be equally evident on both sides of the partisan fence.
As in the US, the attitudes of supporters of the Left-leaning party seem to have become more consistently liberal, in the American understanding of that term. But on economic and social questions alike, the forces that have moved American conservatives further to the Right don’t appear to be exerting much pull in Australia.
On social issues, this shouldn’t come as a surprise — attitudes towards homosexuality in particular have undergone a revolution over the 20-year period in question, and they have been reflected in lesser extent with respect to issues such as abortion and the death penalty.
But it might have been thought that, since the conclusion of the Cold War and its attendant “end of history“, the classically liberal viewpoint has likewise become dominant in economic matters.
Instead, the survey results suggest an electorate with an increasingly social democratic frame of mind. Given a choice between lower tax and maintaining social services, a 56-17 split in favour of lower tax in 1993 was running 36-31 the other way by 2013. Similarly, a 74-13 split in favour of the proposition that higher taxes make people less willing to work had narrowed to 62-17 by 2010, before dropping so far in 2013 (to 49-25) that I don’t entirely trust the result.
Pew Research offers an important note of caution when it observes that an ideological measurement founded on questions that were being asked 20 years ago misses “more recent value divides, such as surveillance and terrorism”. It may be that such issues have been more conducive to conservative opinion.
Perhaps significantly, the only one of the 10 questions identified from the Australian surveys that appeared to indicate a shift to the Right involved foreign policy, with 49% of respondents now rating the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty as very important compared with 37% in in 1993.
A hardened public attitude towards Australia’s position in international affairs would provide further explanation, if any were needed, for the Abbott government’s motivation in banging the national security drum over the past few months.
A reason for this could be that both taxes and social services are actually lower now than in 1993, and nothing to do with ideological shifts. Is this in fact the case?
Why do people persist with the misinformation that it is compulsory to vote in Australia? This is not only inaccurate, it is misleading. It drives me insane, particularly when journalists who are perceived to be sources of accurate information demonstrate how untrue this perception of them actually is. Please Mr Bowe, lift your game.
If you are registered to vote, which is not compulsory, it is then compulsory to get your name ticked off at a polling booth. You can then walk away without voting, or you can go into the booth and tear up your voting paper, or you can put a blank paper into the ballot box. I have done all 3 of these at various times in my life without consequence.
I used to be against compulsory voting, but USA is a prime example of what can happen without it. I wasn’t on the electoral roll for 17 years, without being picked up, however I got on some elections back and have regretted it ever since. Unfortunately, compulsory voting is the best way.
DL is wrong regarding compulsory voting. It is compulsory to be registered. There is no choice here, it’s just that the mechanisms for catching up with you aren’t well developed. Eventually by using other government databases you won’t be able to stay off the electoral roll as I once did.
Having been registered, it is then compusory, at risk of a fine, to attend a polling booth and have your name crossed off and collect a polling paper. Often enough however you can get out of the fine by writing any reasonably plausible story.
Nothing actually requires you to write on that polling paper, but you do have to put it in the boxes provided. Returning officers have to reconcile the number of papers handed out, names crossed off, and number of votes in the boxes.
By ripping up or walking off with your polling paper, you probably just left a poor, beknighted returning officer spend hours trying to look for a missing paper.
Hardly seems worth doing that. They’re just trying to earn a quid while helping out.
[A reason for this could be that both taxes and social services are actually lower now than in 1993, and nothing to do with ideological shifts. Is this in fact the case?]
Very possibly. Something I’d have devoted some attention to, if I wasn’t straining to keep it within a manageable length to begin with.
[Why do people persist with the misinformation that it is compulsory to vote in Australia?]
As a point of pedantry, which is all it is, the correctness of your point is a matter of debate among the relevant legal authorities. It is a problem that doesn’t need to be solved, because it is a law that could not be enforced without breaching another law, relating to the secrecy of the ballot. It is certainly clear though that, whatever you might believe to be the truth, you were not acting in accordance with the law if you walked away without depositing your ballot paper.
None of this is worth splitting hairs over in an article such as this – everybody knows what I mean. Getting my point across clearly and succinctly is far more important than giving satisfaction to people as tiresome as yourself.
Very interesting article, William.
But if Australians have been trending to the left, why have we elected one of the most ‘right-wing’ governments in Oz history?
Also, if voting is compulsory, does that mean by law everyone has to ‘register’ to vote? I only ask this because there is always numerous articles in the media around election time, relating how many 18+ eligible voters are not on the roll. Apart from that, I agree with your comments above.