Katherine Krimmel
Biographic Data
| ID | 4179932 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Katherine Krimmel |
| GIVEN NAMES | Katherine |
| FAMILY NAME | Krimmel |
| SIGNATURE | KRIMMEL K |
| AFFILIATIONS | Columbia University |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-2977-470X |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 8 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 47 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 8 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2016 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 3 |
Hollow Parties, Turbulent Times
Katherine Krimmel reviews The Hollow Parties: The Many Pasts and Disordered Present of American Party Politics by Daniel Schlozman and Sam Rosenfeld. She argues that the book offers valuable new concepts and historical context for understanding pathologies of modern American democracy
Divergent Democracy
An innovative examination of the shift by American political parties toward issue-based differentiation Recent Democratic and Republican party platforms display clear differences on such issues as abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, gun control, and the environment. These distinctions reflect a programmatic party system—that is, one in which policy positions serve as a key basis of electoral competition. Yet party politics were not always so issue-oriented;…
Substantive Divergence
We examine the substantive meaning of public opinion on government spending using open-ended data from an original survey. Belying the conventional wisdom on this subject, we find that public opinion on government spending is not reducible to views on social welfare programs. While most people do have specific associations with spending, in the aggregate, public associations span a wide range of government functions. Balance does not necessarily …
Racial Unfairness and Fiscal Politics
We provide and test a theory explaining how and why racial attitudes shape public opinion on government spending in the United States. We hypothesize that many people think the government allocates money unfairly across racial groups, and “inequity aversion” leads them to reject spending as a result. Using data from an original survey, we find support for our theory in the sample as a whole, and within racial, partisan, and ideological subgroups.…
Rights by Fortune or Fight? Reexamining the Addition of Sex to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
It is widely believed that the extension of protection against employment discrimination to women through Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (CRA) was a fluke, the product of an attempted “killer amendment” by civil rights opponents gone awry. My analysis challenges this conventional wisdom, showing that the coalition of Republicans and southern Democrats in support of the sex amendment to Title VII was consistent with broader patterns of support …
The Efficiencies and Pathologies of Special Interest Partisanship
Why have group-party alliances become more common since the mid-twentieth century? To address this question, I develop a continuum of group-party relationships, running from fluid, unstructured interactions, akin to political pluralism, to highly institutionalized alliances, as we might see in a firm. Drawing on pluralist scholarship and theories of firm formation and evolution, I explore the costs and benefits of different arrangements and expla…
The Federal Spending Paradox
We show how symbolic politics condition public opinion on federal spending and how this helps to explain an important puzzle in contemporary American politics. Using multilevel regression and poststratification to estimate state-level opinion on federal spending, we show that, curiously, opposition to federal spending is higher in states receiving more federal money, per tax dollar paid. Belying the popular narrative surrounding so-called “red st…
Gay Rights in Congress
Journal Article Gay Rights in Congress: Public Opinion and (Mis)representation Get access Katherine Krimmel, Katherine Krimmel 1Katherine Krimmel is an assistant professor of political science at Boston University, Boston, MA, USA. Jeffrey R. Lax and Justin H. Phillips are associate professors of political science at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. For helpful comments, the authors thank Robert Erikson, John Kastellec, Kelly Rader, partic…
Gay Rights in Congress
Journal Article Gay Rights in Congress: Public Opinion and (Mis)representation Get access Katherine Krimmel, Katherine Krimmel 1Katherine Krimmel is an assistant professor of political science at Boston University, Boston, MA, USA. Jeffrey R. Lax and Justin H. Phillips are associate professors of political science at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. For helpful comments, the authors thank Robert Erikson, John Kastellec, Kelly Rader, partic…
The Efficiencies and Pathologies of Special Interest Partisanship
Why have group-party alliances become more common since the mid-twentieth century? To address this question, I develop a continuum of group-party relationships, running from fluid, unstructured interactions, akin to political pluralism, to highly institutionalized alliances, as we might see in a firm. Drawing on pluralist scholarship and theories of firm formation and evolution, I explore the costs and benefits of different arrangements and expla…
The Federal Spending Paradox
We show how symbolic politics condition public opinion on federal spending and how this helps to explain an important puzzle in contemporary American politics. Using multilevel regression and poststratification to estimate state-level opinion on federal spending, we show that, curiously, opposition to federal spending is higher in states receiving more federal money, per tax dollar paid. Belying the popular narrative surrounding so-called “red st…
Racial Unfairness and Fiscal Politics
We provide and test a theory explaining how and why racial attitudes shape public opinion on government spending in the United States. We hypothesize that many people think the government allocates money unfairly across racial groups, and “inequity aversion” leads them to reject spending as a result. Using data from an original survey, we find support for our theory in the sample as a whole, and within racial, partisan, and ideological subgroups.…
Substantive Divergence
We examine the substantive meaning of public opinion on government spending using open-ended data from an original survey. Belying the conventional wisdom on this subject, we find that public opinion on government spending is not reducible to views on social welfare programs. While most people do have specific associations with spending, in the aggregate, public associations span a wide range of government functions. Balance does not necessarily …
Gay Rights in Congress
Journal Article Gay Rights in Congress: Public Opinion and (Mis)representation Get access Katherine Krimmel, Katherine Krimmel 1Katherine Krimmel is an assistant professor of political science at Boston University, Boston, MA, USA. Jeffrey R. Lax and Justin H. Phillips are associate professors of political science at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. For helpful comments, the authors thank Robert Erikson, John Kastellec, Kelly Rader, partic…
The Efficiencies and Pathologies of Special Interest Partisanship
Why have group-party alliances become more common since the mid-twentieth century? To address this question, I develop a continuum of group-party relationships, running from fluid, unstructured interactions, akin to political pluralism, to highly institutionalized alliances, as we might see in a firm. Drawing on pluralist scholarship and theories of firm formation and evolution, I explore the costs and benefits of different arrangements and expla…
The Federal Spending Paradox
We show how symbolic politics condition public opinion on federal spending and how this helps to explain an important puzzle in contemporary American politics. Using multilevel regression and poststratification to estimate state-level opinion on federal spending, we show that, curiously, opposition to federal spending is higher in states receiving more federal money, per tax dollar paid. Belying the popular narrative surrounding so-called “red st…
Rights by Fortune or Fight? Reexamining the Addition of Sex to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
It is widely believed that the extension of protection against employment discrimination to women through Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (CRA) was a fluke, the product of an attempted “killer amendment” by civil rights opponents gone awry. My analysis challenges this conventional wisdom, showing that the coalition of Republicans and southern Democrats in support of the sex amendment to Title VII was consistent with broader patterns of support …
Substantive Divergence
We examine the substantive meaning of public opinion on government spending using open-ended data from an original survey. Belying the conventional wisdom on this subject, we find that public opinion on government spending is not reducible to views on social welfare programs. While most people do have specific associations with spending, in the aggregate, public associations span a wide range of government functions. Balance does not necessarily …
Racial Unfairness and Fiscal Politics
We provide and test a theory explaining how and why racial attitudes shape public opinion on government spending in the United States. We hypothesize that many people think the government allocates money unfairly across racial groups, and “inequity aversion” leads them to reject spending as a result. Using data from an original survey, we find support for our theory in the sample as a whole, and within racial, partisan, and ideological subgroups.…
Divergent Democracy
An innovative examination of the shift by American political parties toward issue-based differentiation Recent Democratic and Republican party platforms display clear differences on such issues as abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, gun control, and the environment. These distinctions reflect a programmatic party system—that is, one in which policy positions serve as a key basis of electoral competition. Yet party politics were not always so issue-oriented;…
Hollow Parties, Turbulent Times
Katherine Krimmel reviews The Hollow Parties: The Many Pasts and Disordered Present of American Party Politics by Daniel Schlozman and Sam Rosenfeld. She argues that the book offers valuable new concepts and historical context for understanding pathologies of modern American democracy
Political science (8 works) · Law (6 works) · Politics (6 works) · Electoral Systems and Political Participation (5 works) · Political economy (5 works) · Sociology (5 works) · Economics (4 works) · Law (4 works) · Public opinion (4 works) · Government spending (3 works)