The predicted effects of distance and population size on voting are displayed

# The predicted effects of distance and population size

• 20

This preview shows page 12 - 14 out of 20 pages.

The predicted effects of distance and population size on voting are displayed in Figure 4. These simulations of voter turnout in 2004 based on size and distance from the demolishedprojects,conditionalonhavingvotedin2000, support Hypothesis 2. Between 2000 and 2004, turnout for the average white registered voter in Chicago declined (see Figure A.2 in the supporting information). Figure 4 reflects voters near the demolished projects decreasing their turnout at a faster rate. Figure 4(a) demonstrates that for a person already inclined to vote, the probability of voting increases with distance: by almost 10 percent- age points when moving 500 meters away from the de- molished projects. This indicates that persons living near projects were significantly motivated by their proximity to the projects when the projects were still standing. Simi- larly,Figure4(b)showsthatasapersonalreadyinclinedto vote moves from living near projects representing a small portion of the local population to living near projects representing a large portion of the local population, her probability of voting decreases, indicating that, for white voters living nearby, the relative size of the local outgroup had a significant effect on voter turnout. Effects on Vote Choice Scholars have observed correlations in a variety of set- tingsbetweenproximateoutgroupsandvotingforracially
DEMOLITION OF PUBLIC HOUSING AND RACIAL THREAT 13 F IGURE 4 Effects of Distance and Size of Projects (a) Distance 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 Distance from Project Pr ( vote 2004 ) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 (b) Percent of Local Black Population 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 Percent of Local Black Population in Demolished Project 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Note: Predicted effects generated from vote 2004 = 0 + 1 ( log ( distance )) + 2 ( log ( localpercent )) + vote 2000 , with white voters. Figure 4(a) is the predicted probability that a person who voted in 2000 will vote in 2004 with increasing distance, while holding size at its mean. Figure 4(b) is the predicted probability that a person who voted in 2000 will vote in 2004, with increasing outgroup population size, with distance = 100. Dotted lines represent 95% confidence intervals generated by bootstrapped standard errors. conservative candidates or against candidates per- ceived as representing the outgroup (Carsey 1995; Enos 2010; Giles and Buckner 1993; Key 1949; Spence and McClerking 2010). An observable implication of my claims about the effect of racial threat on voting is that the removal of the outgroup might produce changes in voters’ propensity to vote Republican. With this claim, I am relying on substantial evidence that more racially con- servative voters prefer Republican candidates (e.g., Tesler and Sears 2010). My prediction in Hypothesis 3 is that the demolition of the housing projects should lower the proportion of white voters living near the projects who vote for Republican candidates.