A recent study conducted by Northwestern University examined whether voters approve of politicians who retaliate against corporate political speech critical of their actions. The research aimed to understand if voters perceive such retaliation as an abuse of political power and whether their opinions are influenced by party affiliation.
The study, conducted in February and April 2024, surveyed 1,000 adults on the potential actions a governor might take against an in-state business that publicly criticized them. Participants were exposed to one of three scenarios: "no attack," where the governor ignores the criticism; "verbal rebuke," where the governor speaks out but takes no further action; and "retributive action," involving punitive measures like removing tax benefits or calling for a boycott.
Mary McGrath, Principal Investigator and assistant professor at Northwestern's Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, stated, “We expected results were going to be entirely reflective of partisanship and completely driven by the voters’ partisan match or mismatch with the elected official.”
The findings revealed no significant difference in voter response between the "no attack" and "verbal rebuke" scenarios, with partisanship being a major factor. However, when governors took retributive actions against companies, there was a notable shift among in-party respondents from positive to negative vote intentions. Comments from survey participants included criticisms likening such actions to those of dictators or tyrants.
McGrath noted surprise at finding no substantial difference between Republican and Democrat voters regarding tolerance for political retribution within their own parties. “There was even evidence of voters responding more negatively to elected officials within their own party who used the powers of their office to punish,” she said.
Lead author Evan Myers expressed optimism about voter recognition and condemnation of anti-democratic behavior despite increasing partisanship. “Given how partisan our politics have become, I expected that voters would approve of almost any behavior so long as it came from their own party, but that simply was not the case,” he remarked.
The study titled “Electoral costs of political retaliation: bipartisan rejection of attacks on corporate speech” has been published by Cambridge University Press’s Business and Politics journal. Coauthors include Anna Wander alongside Evans and McGrath.