Replication Data for: Framing Effects and Group Differences in Public Opinion about Prison Pell Grants

After years of gridlock on the issue, a bipartisan group of Members of Congress has proposed legislation that would restore eligibility for inmates to access Pell Grants. Evidence indicates that college education programs in prison reduce recidivism and, consequently, state corrections expenditures, but legislators in prior decades feared that voters would resent government subsidy of college classes for criminals. To assess the contemporary politics of the issue, we analyze data from a framing experiment embedded in the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). We find that Americans, on average, neither support nor oppose the proposal to restore inmates’ Pell eligibility, but exposure to arguments about the proposal’s benefits to inmates, in particular, and American society, more broadly, both increased subjects’ support. We further explore how this framing effect varies across political partisanship and racial resentment. We find that both frames elicited a positive response from subjects, especially among Democrats and subjects with low or moderate racial resentment.