Michael G. Miller

Assistant Professor of Political Science, Barnard College

Connect with Michael

About Michael

Miller's broad research interests lie in American elections and political behavior, with a particular focus on how policy changes in campaign finance and election administration affect voting behavior.  Miller is also interested in how party elites shape candidacies and election outcomes, how voters process political information, the experience of and reaction to women as candidates, and the manner in which people evaluate politicians involved in political scandals. 

In addition to his work at Barnard, at present Miler is also a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice (NYU Law School), working mostly with the Money in Politics group. His research has been utilized as empirical evidence in a campaign finance case before the United States Supreme Court (McComish v. Bennett), both as cited work in amicus briefs and during oral arguments.  His research has also been cited in committee testimony before the United States Senate and a number of state legislatures and large cities. 


In the News

Michael G. Miller quoted on campaign finance by Joe Andrews, "Majority of Americans Say They Won’t Donate to 2020 Presidential Campaigns" CNBC, July 1, 2019.
Michael G. Miller quoted by Matthew Sheffield, "Could Public Funding of Elections Revolutionize Politics?" Salon, February 20, 2018.
"Will Hillary Clinton's Flip-Flops Hurt Her? Maybe Not," Conor M. Dowling (with David Doherty and Michael G. Miller), The Washington Post, October 15, 2017.
Michael G. Miller's research on Tom Collins, "Claims against Arizona Clean Elections Commission are Misleading," Arizona Republic, February 16, 2017.
Michael G. Miller quoted by Dylan Matthews, "The Great Money in Politics Myth" Vox, February 9, 2016.
"Is Public Funding Really Electing Extremists?," Michael G. Miller (with Seth Masket), The Washington Post, January 22, 2015.
"Fight Fair on Clean Elections," Michael G. Miller, Arizona Republic, September 25, 2014.
Michael G. Miller quoted by Andrew Prokop, "After Arizona Passed Public Financing, Politicians Spent More Time with Voters" Vox, August 13, 2014.
Interview on Public Funding Creates 'Clean Elections' Michael G. Miller, MSNBC The Cycle, January 27, 2014.
Guest to discuss Subsidizing Democracy: Can Public Funding Change Politics? on CSPAN, Michael G. Miller, January 13, 2014.
Conor M. Dowling quoted by Dylan Matthews, "We Asked Science if Eliot Spitzer Could Win. It Said Yes." The Washington Post, July 8, 2013.
"Reform after the IRS Scandal? Don't Bet on It," Michael G. Miller, The Monkey Cage, May 19, 2013.
"Clean Elections vs. Political Speech," Michael G. Miller, The Monkey Cage, March 23, 2011.


"Do Party Chairs Think Women and Minority Candidates Can Win? Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment," (with David Doherty and Michael G. Miller), forthcoming.

An experiment on a national sample of local party chairs shows that while they do not downgrade the electoral chances of women candidates, they do view black and Latina/o candidates more negatively, and this penalty cannot be easily explained by other factors such as local conditions. 

"Subsidizing Democracy: How Public Funding Changes Elections, and How iIt Can Work in the Future" (Cornell University Press, 2014).

Describes how large-scale public election funding programs have changed the behavior of campaigns and voters in the states where they have been implemented.

"Are Financial or Moral Scandals Worse? It Depends" (with David Doherty and Michael G. Miller). Political Science and Politics 44, no. 4 (2011): 749-757.

Exposure to information about fictitious scandals suggests that all else equal, voters view politicians embroiled in financial scandals more harshly than those caught up in sex scandals, and an abuse of power by the politician amplifies the effect of both.