When President Obama pledged "to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" in front of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court on a cold January day in 2009, he became the first black president of a country marked by the painful legacy of the African slave trade. His election represented a major milestone in America's racial history, prompting several commentators to declare Obama's assumption of office as a symbol of a "post-racial America." But according to Assistant Professor of Political Science Michael Tesler, who has spent the past four years researching the effect of Obama's race on political discourse, these pundits' declarations may have come too soon. Tesler found that racial attitudes still play a major role in politics.
In Tesler's 2010 book, "Obama's Race: The 2008 Election and the Dream of a Post-Racial America," he attributes the polarization that pervaded the 2008 campaign to the effect of Americans' inscribed racial attitudes on their political behavior. In his research for the book, he categorized attitudes toward African-Americans on a scale from conservative to liberal - the "racial resentment scale" - and subsequently used the scale to gauge responses to the new president.
To establish an individual's position on the racial resentment scale, Tesler asked predictor questions on topics ranging from interracial marriage to the causes of the economic disadvantages facing many blacks in the United States. His research found that about 60 percent of white Americans answered with the "racially conservative" view that disadvantages stem from individual deficiencies rather than structural inequalities in society. Twenty percent said they opposed interracial marriage, a very conservative view.
Tesler tracked the views of "racial conservatives" and "racial liberals" on Obama's campaign in a series of polls. The results showed a strong correlation between racial attitudes and views of the candidate and his policy. Tesler found Republicans with conservative racial attitudes were much less likely to support Obama over his Republican opponent Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., than they were to vote for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Obama's main rival in the Democratic primary, over McCain.
Though racial liberals are more likely to support Obama, the effect of racial conservatives likely outweighs this benefit, Tesler said. Many political scientists try to determine Obama's "race penalty" - the number of points Obama's racial background costs him in polls and elections - but Tesler said he abstains from this debate because it requires too many assumptions. He said he does believe Obama lost some points - maybe two or three - in the 2008 election as a result, but his estimate places Obama at less of a disadvantage due to his race than others who have maintained that the penalty could have been as high as seven or 10 points.
The more important result of the racial attitudes for Tesler is their effect on the polarization of the political process, he said. If individuals make up their mind about a candidate based on his or her race, it becomes much harder to have a reasonable discourse about substantive issues, he said.
Tesler's research since the election has focused on the ways individuals' racial beliefs affect their views on Obama's policies. Racially conservative individuals were less likely to support the president's initiatives, and racially liberal people were more likely to support his work. He said the correlation between racial views and support for Obama remained significant, even when he controlled for the disproportionate amount of racial conservatives in the Republican Party.
Tesler found that racial attitudes affect how whites view not only the president, but everything associated with him - including his dog, Bo, whom racial conservatives liked less after being informed he was Obama's pet. Opinions on more serious issues like health care are also affected by racial attitudes, Tesler noted.
He also found that among black Americans, who generally hold very racially liberal views, Obama's health care law was 20 percent more popular than President Bill Clinton's similar proposal in the 1990s. Clinton's bill was more liberal on a policy level, but Obamacare, which replicated conservative health care policy from the 1990s, received more support from blacks - indicating racial bias, Tesler said.
Polarization due to race is nothing new, but it has reached unprecedented levels under Obama, Tesler said. Ever since the 1964 presidential election between President Lyndon Johnson and Republican challenger and former Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater, which focused largely on the 1964 Civil Rights Act, voters have split based on their racial views.
As Obama completes his time in public office in the next few months or years - depending on the outcome of Tuesday's election - Tesler will examine whether the spike in polarization during Obama's presidency will continue and how the electorate will react to future minority politicians. Tesler said racial views have remained constant over the last four years, and Obama has not inspired a decrease in racial conservatism, as some expected when he took office.
In his research, Tesler has also examined public opinion of Republican minorities like Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and found that racial conservatives do not oppose him for being Hispanic. Because they agree with his political views, Rubio's race does not bother them, Tesler said.
