How Nonpartisan Ballot Design Conceals Partisanship: A Survey Experiment of School Board Members in Two States

2017 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Elected Officials ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
School Board Members ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Ballot Design ◽  
Democrats And Republicans

Studies suggest that between one-fourth and one-third of localities elect their leaders on partisan ballots. Does the presence of a party label on the ballot affect the level of partisanship in local office? I leverage the fact that within select states, school boards vary as to whether their members are elected on partisan or nonpartisan ballots. Do the differences in policy preferences between Democrats and Republicans differ across these ballot contexts? Does a party cue treatment, where respondents are reminded of the general policy positions of both parties, differentially affect elected officials in different ballot contexts? Evidence from the survey reveals a group of “polarized nonpartisans” who tend to express more partisan views about public policy than their co-partisans elected in an explicitly partisan system. At the same time, providing party cues in policy debates disproportionately moves those elected on partisan ballots as opposed to nonpartisan ones. That partisan-elected officials are more influenced by party cues appears to validate the motivations of nonpartisan reformers, yet the “polarized nonpartisans” found in the control group should give those reformers pause and reveals the need for continued research into the behavioral consequences of nonpartisan ballots.

Do Policy Makers Listen to Experts? Evidence from a National Survey of Local and State Policy Makers

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
NATHAN LEE
Keyword(s):  
National Survey ◽  
Political Behavior ◽  
State Policy ◽  
Elected Officials ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Behavior Theories

Do elected officials update their policy positions in response to expert evidence? A large literature in political behavior demonstrates a range of biases that individuals may manifest in evaluating information. However, elected officials may be motivated to accurately incorporate information when it could affect the welfare of their constituents. I investigate these competing predictions through a national survey of local and state policy makers in which I present respondents with established expert findings concerning three subnational policy debates, debates that vary as to whether Republicans or Democrats are more likely to see the findings as confirmatory or challenging. Using both cross-subject and within-subject designs, I find policy makers update their beliefs and preferences in the direction of the evidence irrespective of the valence of the information. These findings have implications for the application of mass political behavior theories to politicians as well as the prospects for evidence-based policy making.

Bridging the Charter School Accountability Divide: Defining a Role for Nonprofit Charter School Boards

2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 640-658
Author(s):  
Michael R. Ford ◽  
Douglas M. Ihrke
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Charter School ◽  
School Boards ◽  
School Accountability ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
School Board Members ◽  
Staff Performance ◽  
Board Performance ◽  
Governance Reforms

In this article, we use originally collected survey data to determine how nonprofit charter school board members in the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota define accountability. We find that charter board members generally define accountability downward toward student achievement and staff performance, inward toward board performance, or upward toward authorizer compliance. We use the results of the survey to make a series of public policy recommendations to help charter school boards look outward in their accountability orientation as a means of addressing the calls for increased public accountability for the charter school sector. The results add practical value to policy discussions regarding charter school accountability and theoretical value to scholars studying public and nonprofit governance reforms.

Understanding rationales for collaboration in high-intensity policy conflicts

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher M. Weible ◽  
Tanya Heikkila ◽  
Jonathan Pierce
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Professional Competence ◽  
Questionnaire Data ◽  
Policy Actor ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Policy Actors ◽  
Shared Beliefs ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Policy Conflicts

AbstractWhy people collaborate to achieve their political objectives is one enduring question in public policy. Although studies have explored this question in low-intensity policy conflicts, a few have examined collaboration in high-intensity policy conflicts. This study asks two questions: What are the rationales motivating policy actors to collaborate with each other in high-intensity policy conflicts? What policy actor attributes are associated with these rationales? This study uses questionnaire data collected in 2013 and 2014 of policy actors from New York, Colorado and Texas who are actively involved with hydraulic fracturing policy debates. The results show that professional competence is the most important rationale for collaborating, whereas shared beliefs are moderately important, and financial resources are not important. Policy actor attributes that are associated with different rationales include organisational affiliation and extreme policy positions. This article concludes with a discussion on advancing theoretical explanations of collaboration in high-intensity policy conflicts.

Three Famous School Board Members

1931 ◽  
Vol 113 (20) ◽  
pp. 527-528
Author(s):  
Albert E. Winship
Keyword(s):  
School Board ◽  
Board Members ◽  
School Board Members

Famous School Board Members

1931 ◽  
Vol 113 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-33
Author(s):  
J. L. van Norman ◽  
Los Angeles ◽  
Albert E. Winship
Keyword(s):  
School Board ◽  
Board Members ◽  
School Board Members

Three Famous School Board Members

1931 ◽  
Vol 113 (9) ◽  
pp. 246-246
Author(s):  
Albert E. Winship
Keyword(s):  
School Board ◽  
Board Members ◽  
School Board Members

scholarly journals Partisan Ambivalence and Electoral Decision Making

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Craig ◽  
Paulina Cossette ◽  
Michael Martinez
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
American Politics ◽  
Political Campaigns ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Campaign Ads ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Negative Feelings ◽  
Democrats And Republicans ◽  
High Degree

American politics today is driven largely by deep divisions between Democrats and Republicans. That said, there are many people who view the opposition in an overwhelmingly negative light – but who simultaneously possess a mix of positive and negative feelings toward their own party. This paper is a response to prior research (e.g., Lavine, Johnson, and Steenbergen 2012) indicating that such ambivalence increases the probability that voters will engage in "deliberative" (or "effortful") rather than "heuristic" thinking when responding to the choices presented to them in political campaigns. We extend the logic of this argument to a hypothetical race for Congress, using data from a survey experiment to determine whether a high degree of ambivalence toward one's party makes voters more responsive to a negative attack against the candidate of that party. In fact, we find little evidence that partisan ambivalence promotes a deliberative response to negative campaign ads.

Climate Change as a National Security Issue: Examining Framing Effects Across Party

2021 ◽  
pp. 1532673X2110532
Author(s):  
Jason Gainous ◽  
Melissa K. Merry
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
National Security ◽  
Energy Dependence ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Security Issue ◽  
Political Candidates ◽  
Democrats And Republicans ◽  
Climate Change Attitudes

Research suggests that framing climate change as a national security issue can shape opinion about climate change. This research is less clear about what exactly constitutes a “national security frame” and what aspects of this frame are most persuasive. We use a survey experiment to compare the relative effects of three types of national security frames we identify. Results show that a frame centered on energy dependence had the strongest effect and was the most consistent across partisanship. Surprisingly, the effects ran in the opposite direction for Democrats and Republicans on both outcomes—negative for Democrats and positive for Republicans. We also show that the energy dependence frame moderated the influence of respondents’ affect toward political candidates and parties on their climate change attitudes. The results suggest that the energy dependence frame can shape public opinion, but that it must be tailored to particular audiences to avoid backfire effects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document