Resumen

How does a sudden, large-scale inflow of migrants reshape the political attitudes of locals? This paper uses a shift-share design that exploits exogenous variation in arrivals to estimate the effects of Venezuelan migration on political attitudes in Colombia between 2013 and 2019. The results suggest that exposure to the migration shock reduces support for redistribution, shifts ideology to the right, and weakens support for elections by popular vote. A mediation analysis provides suggestive evidence that negative stereotypes about migrants and other migration-related concerns, including perceived labor market competition, security concerns, and concerns about migrants’ use of welfare programs, known as the ``Welfare Magnet'' hypothesis, contribute to explain the decrease in support for redistribution. The decrease of support for elections by popular vote is primarily driven by security concerns and the ``Welfare Magnet'' hypothesis, which may be consistent with doubts about whether elected rulers can ensure an adequate provision of welfare services and maintain public order after the massive migration. Finally, the rightward shift is driven by these concerns and by the propensity of locals to adhere to anti-left narratives, which reflects the role of the associations between left-wing ideology and the Venezuelan regime to explain the shifts in political attitudes.