Suchergebnisse

Abstract
American federalism in 2022–2023 saw a continued escalation of the culture wars, with persistent battles fought between the heavily polarized political parties, different levels of government (including federal versus state governments and state versus local governments), and between states and private business. Policy conflicts have centered on a variety of issues related to reproductive rights, K-12 education, and gun policy, among others. This overview of American federalism during the last year proceeds by first considering major policy activity in Congress, much of which holds significant implications for federalism. Next, we discuss the 2022 midterm elections and the dynamics that largely prevented what many expected to be a "red wave". We then move to discuss significant policy shifts in the areas of civil rights and liberties, environmental policy, and labor, with an emphasis on state policymaking and court decisions. A central theme has been the intensification of cultural disputes as a policymaking focus, particularly at the state level.

Discussions of science and its relevance to public policy have recently taken center stage in political discourse, illustrating the values‐based nature of scientific policy decisions. This article uses an original data set of media coverage to examine the ways in which salience and media portrayals of scientific uncertainty affect the agenda‐setting process for scientific policy issues. We build upon two scholarly literatures by incorporating research on the use of science in the policy process into the study of policy diffusion among the American states. In doing so, we develop a framework for how media portrayals of scientific information can affect agenda setting. We test this framework on three scientific issues: Genetically modified food labeling, human papillomavirus vaccinations, and indoor tanning. Our results indicate that lawmakers introduce more legislation on salient issues, while higher reported levels of scientific uncertainty reduce the likelihood of bill introductions. This finding illustrates the potential impact of national media coverage as an information transmission mechanism and the necessity of treating policy characteristics as subject to change over time.

AbstractHow does the salience of environmental issues influence climate policy adoption in the American states? This article considers how two aspects of public salience, issue problem status and issue attention, work with environmental interest group membership to influence climate policy adoption in the American states. We contribute to the theoretical development of issue salience and offer alternative measures that capture differences in salience across subnational units. We find evidence that states where climate change is perceived to be a problem, and where attention to environmental issues is high, are more likely to adopt relevant policies. Furthermore, states with Republican majorities in either legislative chamber are less likely to adopt climate policies. Our findings have implications for the impact of salience on the policy process.

Climate change policymaking has stalled at the federal level in the United States, especially since Donald Trump's election as president. Concurrently, extreme weather, rising sea levels, and other climatic effects have increased the salience of climate change in the mass public and among elected officials. In response, legislators in state governments increasingly introduce and adopt policies associated with climate change. In this article, we evaluate the state of climate change policymaking in state legislatures, with a focus on overall trends in climate mitigation and adaptation innovation and cases of policy retrenchment. We document an increased level of climate legislation introduced in U.S. states since President Trump's election, particularly in states under Democratic Party control. We evaluate patterns of introduced legislation across the states between 2011 and 2019 and consider the factors associated with bill sponsorship. Our results demonstrate the increased partisan nature of climate change policymaking in U.S. states.

What factors influence agenda setting behavior in state legislatures in the United States? Using the localized effects of climate change, we examine whether notable changes in temperature can raise the salience of the issue, thus encouraging a legislative response. To evaluate the behavior of individual legislators around climate policy, we utilize an original data set that includes geographic mapping of climate anomalies at the state legislative district level and incorporates individual, chamber, district, and state characteristics to predict climate bill sponsorship. Using a multilevel model that estimates climate change bill sponsorship among 25,000 legislators from 2011 to 2015, we find a robust relationship between temperature anomalies and bill sponsorship for Democratic members of state legislators while Republicans are unresponsive to such factors. Our data and methodological approach allow us to examine legislative action on climate change beyond final policy passage and offers an opportunity to understand the motivations behind climate innovation in the American states.

AbstractThe use of scientific information in the policy-making process is prevalent in today's society, and political figures frequently consult scientists and experts when considering complex issues like climate change. While policy process literature concerning agenda setting and policy networks, such as epistemic communities and advocacy coalitions, considers the role of scientists in policymaking, very little work has provided insight into the relative influence and perceived relationships between scientists and policymakers. The ability of scientists and policymakers to work together has important implications for policy outcomes. We explore individual scientist's perceptions of the collective influence the scientific community has on policymaking, in addition to perceptions of relationships between scientists and policymakers. We suggest that a number of factors are relevant including trust, contact, attitudes, specialisation and demographics. Our findings indicate that, from scientists' perspectives, contact with policymakers, trust and attitudes about climate change play a significant role in shaping their relationship with policymakers.

AbstractThis study examines the factors that explain public preferences for a set of climate change policy alternatives. While scholarly work indicates a relationship between attitudes and values on views toward specific issues, the literature often examines general support for issues rather than specific policy proposals. Consequently, it is unclear the extent to which these attitudes and values affect specific policy considerations. This project examines public support for five climate change policy options in two national surveys taken three years apart. The empirical analysis reveals that time is a factor and that those who are liberal, have strong ecological values, report greater concern for climate change, and trust experts are consistently more supportive of the climate policy options considered here. The results shed new light on the nuanced views of the American public toward climate change.

Abstract
Research on the activities and influence of interest groups in state legislatures faces a data problem: we are missing a comprehensive, systematic dataset of interest groups' policy preferences on state legislation. We address this gap by introducing the Dataset on Policy Choice and Organizational Representation in the United States (CHORUS). This dataset compiles over 13 million policy positions stated by tens of thousands of interest groups and individuals on bills in 17 state legislatures over the past 25 years. We describe the process used to construct CHORUS and present a new network science technique for analyzing policy position data from interest groups: the layered stochastic block model, which groups similar interest groups and bills together, respectively, based on patterns in the policy positions. Through two demonstrative applications, we show the utility of these data, combined with our novel analytical approach, for understanding interest group configurations in different state legislatures and policy areas.

AbstractThe American states are engaged in a variety of policy efforts to mitigate climate change and alter energy usage. While a number of studies have considered the reasons for adoption of renewable energy and climate change policies, they typically consider only one policy in isolation. This study examines policy adoption of 14 energy and climate change programs in a pooled event history analysis. Our primary research questions consider average effects of horizontal policy diffusion, while also identifying factors that vary across policy type. We offer a method of testing whether predictors vary across policies and use this test to incorporate interactions by policy in the statistical analysis. Our results indicate that many of the primary drivers of adoption are political in nature, including state ideology, environmental interest group membership, and diffusion via ideologically similar neighbors. In addition, we find that given policy heterogeneity, a number of determinants vary by policy type, though differences are in magnitude rather than direction.

Over the past decade the partisan divide over environmental issues has widened significantly. Although attitudes toward climate change and other environmental policy issues have become highly polarized, it is possible that personal geography may moderate partisan attitudes. This study considers whether residing in coastal Virginia influences attitudes on environmental issues among Virginians. To test this question, we survey Virginia registered voters on a range of coastal environmental issues and consider whether place of residence has an effect on these attitudes when accounting for other factors including partisanship. We find a significant relationship between place of residence and a wide range of environmental issue attitudes, though the impact of partisanship is moderated in only limited cases. This research builds on the policy process literature concerning individual proximity to policy problems, place-attachment, and the relationship between partisanship and state environmental policy attitudes.

Abstract Many U.S. states have taken significant action on climate change in recent years, demonstrating their commitment despite federal policy gridlock and rollbacks. Yet, there is still much we do not know about the agents, discourses, and strategies of those seeking to delay or obstruct state-level climate action. We first ask, what are the obstacles to strong and effective climate policy within U.S. states? We review the political structures and interest groups that slow action, and we examine emerging tensions between climate justice and the technocratic and/or market-oriented approaches traditionally taken by many mainstream environmental groups. Second, what are potential solutions for overcoming these obstacles? We suggest strategies for overcoming opposition to climate action that may advance more effective and inclusive state policy, focusing on political strategies, media framing, collaboration, and leveraging the efforts of ambitious local governments.