Arthur Brooks writes:
Over the past several years, studies have consistently shown that people on the political right outperform those on the left when it comes to charity. This pattern appears to have held — increased, even — in 2008.
In May of last year, the Gallup polling organization asked 1,200 American adults about their giving patterns. People who called themselves “conservative” or “very conservative” made up 42% of the population surveyed, but gave 56% of the total charitable donations. In contrast, “liberal” or “very liberal” respondents were 29% of those polled but gave just 7% of donations.
These disparities were not due to differences in income. People who said they were “very conservative” gave 4.5% of their income to charity, on average; “conservatives” gave 3.6%; “moderates” gave 3%; “liberals” gave 1.5%; and “very liberal” folks gave 1.2%.
A common explanation for this pattern is that conservatives are more religious than liberals, and are simply giving to their churches. My own [Brooks’s] research in the past showed that religion was a major reason conservatives donated so much, and that secular conservatives gave even less than secular liberals.
It appears this is no longer the case, however: The 2008 data tell us that secular conservatives are now outperforming their secular liberal counterparts. Compare two people who attend religious services less than once per year (or never) and who are also identical in terms of income, education, sex, age and family status — but one is on the political right while the other is on the left. The secular liberal will give, on average, $1,100 less to charity per year than the secular conservative. The conservative charity edge cannot be explained away by gifts to churches.
Brooks also discusses why the difference can’t simply be explained by differences in political contributions. But then he writes:
Ironically, few environments are less tolerant of conservatives and their ideas than the nonprofit world. The Chronicle of Philanthropy reported in October of 2008 that employees of major charities favored Democrats over Republicans in their private political contributions by a margin of 82% to 18%. Among the employees of major foundations, the difference was an astounding 98% to 2%.
Wow! That 98% to 2% is pretty amazing. I expect that more than 2% of foundation employees vote Republican, but I guess the gap among big contributors is larger. In any case I agree this is evidence that they’re mostly Democrats, but I don’t see this as evidence of them being “less tolerant.”
So liberals are willing to actually spend time doing charitable work, while conservatives buy out their consciences and send checks. Got it!
(Kidding of course.)
Self-reported giving… hmmm, which groups are most likely to overreport, the groups with a high need for social conformity and positive recognition from others (they perceive as) like them, or the groups with a low need for social conformity?
I notice one study referenced in http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19409188/ estimates U.S. charitable giving at 1.7% of GDP. This includes corporate giving and bequests, about 25% of the total. Guess this means there aren't very many conservatives in the U.S., if they're giving 3.6% – 4.5% of their income to charity. Not that many moderates either, I suppose.
About 1/3 of the total goes to churches. How much money donated to churches goes right back into the church, in the form of salaries of the pastor and other officials, renovations, etc., and how much actually goes to REAL charity outside the four walls of the church? How much of that 1/3 comes from conservatives vs. liberals?
Somehow I don't seem to be coming to the conclusion that the authors' findings are indicative of what they think their findings are indicative of…
Barbar, from what I've heard conservatives are more likely to donate both time and blood. Personally, I'm a non-believing paleolibertarian that doesn't give squat.
John, this blogger claims that liberal and feminist women are more concerned with their kids being popular:
http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2009/01/liberal-and…
Maybe it's because the combination of greed and a zero sum view of wealth that motivates the majority of liberal voters (who have next to nothing in common with the thoughtful and compassionate academics who are so often on the left) to favor transfers to themselves from others also makes charitable giving seem unattractive.
The first thing I notice about that blog post is this:
"""The General Social Survey asks people how important certain qualities are "for a child to learn to prepare him or her for life" """
The author seems to conflate that with "which qualities people think are most desirable".
Interesting. Yet liberals don't mind paying more taxes.
I guess that Bill Gates was not one of the 1,200 American adults. ^_^ Anyway, I tend to be skeptical about statistical reports written by a journalist.
That's an excellent point about the taxes… insofar as liberals prefer higher levels of welfare, one might conclude they donate to charity using government mechanisms rather than church or private mechanisms. Of course, the government mechanisms have lots of differences from the church or private mechanisms too.
Or since liberals congregate in urban areas with higher taxes, they are left with less to contribute than conservatives in rural areas with low taxes.
Liberals don't think it's so bad to cheat on taxes:
http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2006/07/liberals-…
William, you're correct that the wording is ambiguous. I would expect people who think something is morally good to claim it is important for their children though.
James, my guess is that liberals are less greedy, judging by the relatively (considering educational credentials) low paying jobs they are attracted to. I think that's why conservatives with phds are less likely to remain in academia.
It might also be a difference in what people interpret as charity.
A conservative may think giving a person $5 to wash their car windows at the red light is charity. A liberal might consider that as paying for a job to be done and not charity.
Megan Pledger, I find that really doubtful. I've never heard of anyone who thinks being charitable is synonymous with giving to charity.
The point I was trying to make was that different idealogies have different viewpoints on what charitable giving is. If the two groups interpret the question posed to them differently and we get a difference between the two groups then what conclusion can we draw?
Anyway, it would be interesting to make a comparison adjusting for age and sex since older people (and hence higher income earners) and males (and hence higher income earners) are more likely to be conservative.