Conflicted conservatives, punitive views, and anti-Black racial bias 1974–2014
| DOI | 10.1177/1462474517736295 |
| Author | Kelly M Socia,Elizabeth K Brown,Jasmine R Silver |
| Date | 01 January 2019 |
| Published date | 01 January 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Conflicted conservatives,
punitive views, and
anti-Black racial
bias 1974–2014
Elizabeth K Brown
University of Massachusetts Boston, USA
Kelly M Socia
University of Massachusetts Lowell, USA
Jasmine R Silver
University at Albany, SUNY, USA
Abstract
Research suggests that the views of “conflicted conservatives,” Americans who self-
identify as conservative but express support for liberal governmental policies and
spending, are particularly important in policymaking and politics bec ause they are polit-
ically engaged and often act as swing voters. We examine punitive views among con-
flicted conservatives and other political subgroups in three distinct periods in the pol-
itics of punishment in America between 1974 and 2014. In particular, we consider the
punitive views of conflicted conservatives relative to consistent conservatives, moder-
ates, and liberals. Given the barrier that racialized typifications of violent crime may
pose to current criminal justice reform efforts, we also explore the role of anti-Black
bias in predicting punitive views among White Americans across political subgroups.
Our overall findings indicate that conflicted conservatives are like moderates in their
support for the death penalty and like consistent conservatives on beliefs about court
harshness. These findings, and supplemental analyses on punitive views and voting
behaviors across political subgroups, call into question whether conflicted conserva-
tives have acted as critical scorekeepers on penal policy issues. We also find that
Corresponding author:
Elizabeth K Brown, Sociology Department, University of Massachusetts Boston, 100 Morrissey Boulevard,
Boston, MA 02125, USA.
Email: Elizabeth.Brown@umb.edu
Punishment & Society
2019, Vol. 21(1) 3–27
!The Author(s) 2017
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1462474517736295
journals.sagepub.com/home/pun
anti-Black racism was significantly related to punitive views across political subgroups
and among liberals in particular.
Keywords
conflicted conservatives, political ideology, public opinion, punishment, racial bias
Introduction
Punitive public views in the U.S. have been cast as an important contributor to the
emergence and proliferation of severe and often racialized crime control policies,
particularly from the 1970s through the 1990s (Simon, 2007; Tonry, 2004). While
the roles of public opinion in penal policymaking are diffuse, and debate exists on
the ordering of effects and possible simultaneity of influence between the public
and policymakers (Beckett, 1997; Enns, 2014, 2016), there is widespread agreement
that increasing public punitiveness was an important contextual factor in “the
punitive turn” of the 20th century (Garland, 2001).
Prior research has failed to consider shifts in the punitive views of a particularly
influential ideological subgroup: conflicted conservatives (Ellis and Stimson, 2012).
Research suggests that conflicted conservatives, a group of people who self-identify
as conservative but who prefer operationally liberal policies and spending, have
been found to wield disproportionate influence in elections and on policy because
they often act as swing voters (Ellis and Stimson, 2012). Conflicted conservatives
have also been found to be more politically engaged than moderates, more likely
than other ideological groups to vote across party lines, and more tuned into and
responsive to shifts in political rhetoric on issues (Ellis and Stimson, 2012).
The present study focuses on two issues. First, we extend prior research on trends
in punitive views, research that shows overall increases in punitiveness in the 1980s
and early 1990s and subsequent declines (Enns, 2016; Ramirez, 2013b), by examin-
ing punitive views across political subgroups, with an emphasis on conflicted con-
servatives. Given their supposed political power, we are particularly interested in
comparing punitiveness among conflicted conservatives with the views of other polit-
ical groups. Because penal policy and rhetoric became increasingly punitive through
the 1990s and then less punitive in the first decade of the 21st century, we expect that
conflicted conservatives were significantly more punitive than moderates (more like
consistent conservatives) from 1974 through the 1990s and significantly less punitive
than moderates (more like liberals) in the 2000s.
Overall, our findings suggest that on court severity, conflicted conservatives
were statistically indistinguishable from consistent conservatives over the entire
40-year time frame evaluated. On the death penalty, conflicted conservatives
were indistinguishable from moderates on the death penalty across the entire
time frame. Supplemental analyses of voting behaviors (voting in Presidential
elections and voting for Republican Presidential candidates) indicate that punitive
views do not drive the voting behaviors of conflicted conservatives more than other
4Punishment & Society 21(1)
To continue reading
Request your trial