A whirlwind week in which Joe Biden bowed out of the 2024 presidential race and Kamala Harris became the Democrats' heir apparent finds us with little time to assess the new election paradigm. This week, we discussed the dynamics with two UCR experts. First, we speak withUgo Antonio Troiano, an economist who has studied women in positions of leadership. Second, we interviewed political scientist John Cioffi, a constitutional and legal scholar who weighs in on Republican threats to challenge Biden's 11th-hour replacement.
Q: What financial impacts can society see when a woman manages finances for her own family or a company? Can this be true for a female head of state?
Troiano: The Nobel Prize-winning economist Esther Duflo's research in South Africa studied pensions given to the poor. Pensions to women increased the weight of the granddaughters (the weight is a measure of their health) but not significantly for male grandchildren. Pensions given to men don’t seem to matter for the nutritional health of their grandchildren. Gender matters, on average, and it’s an established result, not only in the social sciences.
When managing public money, two key components are ability and honesty. For ability, measured via education, women and men are on average similarly educated (with women recently leading in higher education attendance). For honesty, women have the clear lead. Crime is a sign of that honesty. For instance, in the U.S, only 6.7% of inmates are female. My research in Brazil has shown that female mayors are less likely to be found corrupt in audits compared to male mayors, even when all other city-specific differences are controlled. An environment that is not corrupt benefits all honest citizens, both male and female.
Q: You have conducted research on women in politics. Can you share key takeaways? Are these findings applicable to the U.S., especially now that we have a woman running for the presidency?
Troiano: In Brazil, my co-author Fernanda Brollo and I found that women attract more transfers for their city, are associated with better municipal health outcomes, and are less likely to be corrupt. Despite this, male mayors are more likely to be re-elected, assuming they choose to run again. We also found that female mayors hire fewer temporary public employees during the electoral year and attract fewer campaign contributions when running for re-election. We interpret our findings as suggesting that male incumbents are more likely to engage in strategic behavior, improving their electoral performance. While these findings are statistically valid for Brazil, they may offer insights applicable to the U.S. For instance, the fact that the U.S. has never had a female president despite decades of educational parity between male and female citizens suggests that certain strategic behaviors may also be relevant in the U.S., and women may be disadvantaged by the strategic behavior of their male colleagues.
Q: Re. subbing out Biden, is the GOP correct that there is a basis for legal challenges in individual states? For instance, the conservative Heritage Foundation asserts that Wisconsin does not permit withdrawal for any reason other than death.
Cioffi: The Republicans have no legal basis for challenging the Democrat’s naming Harris as their presidential candidate. Prior to the convention’s formal nomination and ballot deadlines under state law, presidential nominations are governed under party convention rules. The Democrats’ rules allow delegates to vote for candidates they believe in “good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.” As Biden’s running mate, it would be hard to conceive of a successful challenge to Biden’s delegates now voting for Harris. (Interestingly, the GOP has much stricter rules binding delegates to their initial candidates, but that’s not a problem for the Democrats.)
It is also hard to envision any Republicans having standing to challenge the switch of candidate under Democratic Party rules. Though these days one can never completely discount the possibility of a partisan judge from issuing an otherwise indefensible decision to benefit the GOP. Exhibit A: Judge Cannon’s dismissal of the Trump classified documents case in Florida. But I cannot envision the courts intervening under current circ*mstances.
Harris also appears to have a clear claim on the campaign funds, which were raised in the name of the Biden-Harris re-election campaign.
GOP complaints about the legality and allegedly undemocratic character of Biden’s withdrawal from the race will not even work to muddy the political waters and delay Democratic consolidation around the new candidate. Whatever one thinks of Kamala Harris as a politician, public official, and candidate, the party has rallied around her with remarkable speed — and there isn’t a damned thing the Republicans can do about it.
Q: Would the switch be more complicated for the Democrats if Biden had been nominated?
Cioffi: Had Biden waited until after the convention to pull out, that would have presented a very different situation in which some state election laws may have prevented the change on the ballot and/or required electors in the Electoral College to cast votes for him despite having withdrawn. Had he waited this long, the courts may well have gotten involved, with the GOP waging “lawfare” against the Democrats. Fortunately, we are not in that situation.
Q: What is the GOP's motivation in threatening legal action? Stall and keep the Dems from consolidating? In its opposition to Biden leaving the ticket, does the GOP risk voters inferring the GOP is not happy w Trump's chances in the new paradigm?
Cioffi: The fact that the GOP is making these arguments against the Democrats’ changing their presidential candidate is an indication of weakness and panic. This is a great example of “be careful what you (publicly) wish for.” The Trump campaign was delighted to run against Biden, who was an exceptionally weak candidate largely due to the public perception of his frailty. Now that avenue of attack is gone. Trump is also an exceptionally weak candidate with a hard core of zealous supporters who are a distinct minority of the electorate supporting a candidate with extremely high negative ratings in the polls. Trump is now the doddering and often incoherent old man in this election contest, and he — a convicted felon — is facing a seasoned and highly articulate prosecutor. There’s a reason why “the prosecutor or the perp” is already becoming a meme characterizing this election.
