Why Political Identity Might Shape Giving
Michele Margolis and Michael Sances investigate whether—and how—partisan identity shapes an ostensibly apolitical behavior: voluntary donations to charitable organizations. The study asks whether Democrats and Republicans differ in how much they give to charity, and which mechanisms (religious practice, ideological views about government, or status signaling) account for any difference. Understanding these links matters for debates about the social roots of political identity and the broader consequences of political polarization in the United States.
Three National Surveys, Including a Two-Wave Panel
- The authors analyze three nationally representative surveys, one of which is an original two-wave panel designed to track individuals over time.
- The survey evidence allows comparison of overall giving by partisan identification and assessment of candidate mechanisms that might explain partisan gaps.
What the Analysis Tests
The paper evaluates competing explanations for partisan differences in giving: (1) religiosity (religious affiliation and practice), (2) ideological preferences about the size and role of government (which could reduce private giving), and (3) conspicuous consumption or the desire to signal economic status. Models test how controlling for these factors alters the partisan gap in charitable donations.
Key Findings
- Republicans give more to charity on average than Democrats across the surveys analyzed.
- The partisan gap is largely explained by differences in religiosity: religious commitment and church-based networks account for much of higher giving among Republicans.
- Differences in beliefs about government spending and evidence of status-signaling behavior do not account for the partisan gap.
Why This Matters
By showing that social ties and religious practice, rather than policy preferences or status signaling, underlie partisan differences in private giving, Margolis and Sances provide evidence that political identity is rooted in social life as much as in ideology. The results imply that political fragmentation can spill into everyday civic behavior, affecting patterns of private support for nonprofit activity across the United States.
