scholarly journals Ideology, Party, and Opinion: Explaining Individual Legislator ACA Implementation Votes in the States

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boris Shor
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Affordable Care Act ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
State Legislators ◽  
Important Predictor ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Issue Area ◽  
Show Evidence ◽  
The Affordable Care Act

Why do state legislators vote the way they do? Which influence is predominant: ideology, party, or public opinion? The implementation votes surrounding the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provides a unique setting to examine this question, as they make all three considerations highly salient. State roll call votes on ACA implementation were sometimes polarized and sometimes unexpectedly bipartisan. What accounts for the heterogeneity in individual legislator behavior on bills implementing the ACA at the state level? Using new data on legislator ideology and votes from 2011–2015, I show evidence that legislator ideology was by far the most important predictor of voting on implementation votes, far more so than legislator party or public opinion. Moreover, I show the influence of ideology is heterogeneous by issue area and bill.

National Policies, Agendas, and Polarization in American State Legislatures: 2011 to 2014

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 939-979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Garlick
Keyword(s):  
Political Discourse ◽  
State Legislatures ◽  
State Level ◽  
State Legislators ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
National Policies ◽  
Party Leaders ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
The Media ◽  
American State

Why are some states polarized and others not? This article argues that state legislators are provided with more information by lobbyists and the media about national policies, or state-level bills that are prominent in the national political discourse. Compared with state-specific issues, this additional information encourages legislators to vote along party lines to secure reelection or prepare for a run for higher office. It identifies national policies using lobbying registrations in state legislatures and Congress to show there is more party difference on roll-call votes on national policies in 25 states over 2011 to 2014. It also argues that the notoriety of national issues may encourage party leaders to put these bills on the agenda to build their party brand, or for individual legislators to raise their profiles. It finds that states with more national agendas have more polarized sessions.

The ACA a Decade In: Resilience, Impact, and Vulnerabilities

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 595-608
Author(s):  
Mark A. Peterson
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Affordable Care Act ◽  
Cost Control ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Universal Coverage ◽  
The Affordable Care Act

Abstract A decade after its enactment, the Affordable Care Act remains both politically viable and consequential, despite Republican efforts to end it. The law's impact on insurance coverage is substantial but remains distant from universal coverage, while its contributions to cost control are at best limited. National public opinion data collected by the author in 2018 reveal both strengths and vulnerabilities in the act.

scholarly journals The State of Diabetes Prevention Policy in the USA Following the Affordable Care Act

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Juleigh Nowinski Konchak ◽  
Margaret R. Moran ◽  
Matthew J. O’Brien ◽  
Namratha R. Kandula ◽  
Ronald T. Ackermann
Keyword(s):  
Affordable Care Act ◽  
Diabetes Prevention ◽  
The State ◽  
Prevention Policy ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Affordable Care Act

scholarly journals When and How New Policy Creates New Politics: Examining the Feedback Effects of the Affordable Care Act on Public Opinion

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 345-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence R. Jacobs ◽  
Suzanne Mettler
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Political Behavior ◽  
Affordable Care Act ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
Panel Study ◽  
Policy Feedback ◽  
Political Factors ◽  
Feedback Effects ◽  
New Politics ◽  
The Affordable Care Act

Following E. E. Schattschneider’s observation that “a new policy creates a new politics,” scholars of “policy feedback” have theorized that policies influence subsequent political behavior and public opinion. Recent studies observe, however, that policy feedback does not always occur and the form it takes varies considerably. To explain such variation, we call for policy feedback studies to draw more thoroughly on public opinion research. We theorize that: (1) feedback effects are not ubiquitous and may in some instances be offset by political factors, such as partisanship and trust in government; (2) policy design may generate self-interested or sociotropic motivations, and (3) feedback effects result not only from policy benefits but also from burdens. We test these expectations by drawing on a unique panel study of Americans’ responses to the Affordable Care Act. We find competing policy and political pathways, which produce variations in policy feedback.

scholarly journals The COVID States Project #20: Public opinion around federal and state reactions to COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lazer ◽  
Alexi Quintana ◽  
Jon Green ◽  
Katherine Ognyanova ◽  
Hanyu Chwe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Prefer State ◽  
Consistent Picture

In every month, April through October of 2020, we surveyed individuals in every state about how federal and state governments are reacting to the pandemic. We found a remarkably consistent picture of public opinion: respondents prefer state governments over the federal government when it comes to COVID-19. Out of 8 waves in 50 states & DC − a total of 408 surveys at the state level − in 402 state-level surveys more people in the state felt the state government was reacting “about right” to the COVID-19 outbreak as compared to the federal government; and only 6 times did people in a state choose the federal government over their state government.

Sub-constituencies and Legislative Responsiveness: Evidence from the States

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 473-487
Author(s):  
Jillian Jaeger
Keyword(s):  
Political Party ◽  
State Legislatures ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
The Political ◽  
Legislative Behavior ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Level Data ◽  
Congressional Behavior ◽  
Level Of Analysis

This article tests whether theories of congressional behavior that link legislative responsiveness to the preferences of sub-constituencies at the expense of party preferences apply to the state level. Using ten years of state-level data and roll-call data from nearly 4,000 individual votes on E-Verify legislation, I examine the competing influences of party and constituency preferences on legislative behavior. The results confirm that state legislatures/legislators are responsive to sub-constituencies, but find that responsiveness plays out in different ways depending on the level of analysis and the political party and constituents in question. These results have important implications for our understanding of legislative representation: because responsiveness to sub-constituencies can yield policy results that are antithetical to stated party goals, what appears to be collective irresponsibility from a party may actually be individual legislators striving to be responsive to those constituents that they anticipate will hold them accountable.

Partisan Differences in Job Approval Ratings of George W. Bush and U.S. Senators in the States

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary C. Jacobson
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
State Level ◽  
Degree Of Polarization ◽  
The Political ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Approval Ratings ◽  
Public Opinion Surveys ◽  
Sources Of Variation ◽  
Job Approval ◽  
Political Opinions

This chapter addresses issues related to partisan differences in political opinions by examining a unique set of state-level public opinion surveys. It compares the state-level determinants of the job approval ratings of the president and the senators and finds that they have almost nothing in common. The chapter then compares the sources of partisan differences in states' ratings of the president and senators and again finds that they have almost nothing in common. Next, it explores in greater detail the sources of variation in the degree of polarization inspired by senators' ratings, finding that these differ somewhat between Republican and Democratic senators but remain to an important degree under a senator's control. The chapter then shows how senators have adapted their roll-call behavior to the political leanings of their states, before drawing some conclusions.

Public Opinion

2019 ◽  
pp. 150-181
Author(s):  
Rachel VanSickle-Ward ◽  
Kevin Wallsten
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Health Insurance ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Birth Control ◽  
Affordable Care Act ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Health Insurance Coverage ◽  
The Affordable Care Act ◽  
The 1950S

Chapter 8 describes the contours of public support for access to birth control over the last 60 years and for the contraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) between 2011 and 2014. Drawing on data from numerous polling organizations, this chapter shows that majorities of both political parties, both genders, and all races and religious affiliations have had stable and supportive opinions on whether women should have access to birth control and whether contraceptives are morally acceptable since at least the 1950s. Our analysis also reveals, however, that large partisan, gender, and “God-based” gaps in public support for requiring health insurance coverage of contraceptives developed as a result of the 2012 debate over the ACA’s birth control mandate. The divisions in public opinion driven by the competing accusations of a “war on women” and a “war on religion” persist today.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document