Seminar on State & Local Politics

POLI 6310 Seminar on State & Local Politics Spring 2011 212 Liberal Arts

Dan Lewis 230 Milneburg Hall [email protected] (504) 280-3203 Office Hours: T W Th 3-5p

Course Description & Learning Objectives

This course is designed as a survey of state politics research. We will cover both institutional and behavioral aspects of state politics, usually from a comparative approach. As you’ll see throughout the course one of the advantages of studying American politics at the state level is the ability to compare institutional arrangements and political culture across the fifty states.

Upon successful completion of this course students should have a thorough understanding of the major avenues of current state politics research and the debates within this subfield. Students should also be able to analyze and critique the existing state politics literature while also identifying areas for further research and study.

Class Meetings

Class will meet once a week to discuss and analyze the readings assigned for that week. These meetings will be student-driven – I will not lecture – so the content of each week is dependent on all students reading and engaging with the course material. The course will be as interesting and useful to your graduate careers as you all make it.

Clearly, attendance at these meetings is not only crucial to success in this course, but also important in your overall graduate training. Though I do not take attendance, participation is a significant part of your course grade. If you frequently miss class, it will be reflected in your course grade. Obviously, if you cannot attend a class meeting for emergency or unforeseen work events, please let me know beforehand.

As with any class, I expect students to be respectful of one another. This means turning off cell phones, getting to class on time, and being courteous during discussions (no matter how much you disagree with the speaker). Though we may cover some controversial topics, class should not be used as an open opinion forum – keep the discussion focused on class material.

1 Texts

Almost all the readings are journal articles which can be found via JSTOR or another electronic journal site. State Politics & Policy Quarterly articles are only available up to 2005. I will post pdf files of more recent SPPQ articles on the course blackboard site.

In addition to the journal articles that will be the focus of weekly discussions, I am also assigning several chapters from a textbook by Virginia Gray and Russell Hanson. These chapters should give you a broad overview of the weekly topic and may cover some subjects that we do not explicitly examine in our class meetings. This should help in finding paper topics and in studying for exams. Though it is a textbook, I have found it to be a very useful overview of current state politics research and it contains a lot of useful data.

Gray, Virginia and Russell L. Hanson. 2008. Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis, 9th ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Assignments & Grading

Grading in this course will be comparable to grading in other graduate political science courses. I expect everyone to earn an A, which indicates a mastery of the course material, as well as a conference-quality research/research design paper. That said, earning an A or B in this class requires significant time and effort. I will not hesitate to give C’s, D’s and F’s to those who do not meet the course standards.

The course grade will be based mostly on a research paper, but participation in weekly seminar will also count. The paper is worth 60% of the final grade and participation will count for 40%.

Research Paper The paper should be roughly 20-30 pages in length (standard formats) and is due at the end of the semester. A paper proposal, 1-2 pages in length, must be submitted by March 16. The proposals should include a description of the research question (be specific), a short description of the existing literature, your theoretical framework, and the data you intend to use. Not all proposals will be accepted. Of course, I will work with you to find an acceptable project should your initial proposal not be acceptable. Start thinking about a paper topic as early as you can. Throughout the semester, I will be available to discuss topics and help choosing a paper topic. Research design papers are only acceptable for first year students.

Participation The participation grade is based on three critical review essays, a “journal club” presentation, and your participation in class discussions. The essays should cover all the assigned articles for the week, but you do not need to cover the Gray & Hansen chapters. They should focus on synthesizing the various articles and arguments, and critiquing the readings. Essays that simply summarize the readings will receive low grades. Though there is no page minimum, I expect the papers to be roughly 3-4 pages long. They essays should be submitted via email to me by Wednesday night (midnight), so that I can

2 distribute them to the class on Thursday before seminar. Late papers will not be accepted.

In addition to the review essays, each student will also be responsible for identifying a current journal article relevant to one of the week’s topics and presenting that article to the class. Students should choose an article a week prior to the presentation so that everyone can read the article before class meets. Articles must be drawn from one of the following journals: American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, the Journal of Politics, Political Research Quarterly, Legislative Studies Quarterly, State Politics and Policy Quarterly, or Publius. The article must have been published in the last three years. Article selections must be approved by me and must be selected no later than the Tuesday before it is to be presented to allow the class time to read it. The presentation should be about 10 minutes in length and students are encouraged to use PowerPoint or similar visual aids. The presentation should identify the main research question, briefly summarize the relevant literature, and describe the theory, research design and findings. The presenter should offer a few critiques and/or discussion questions for the class. The presenter should be prepared to answer questions from the class regarding the article.

Academic Integrity

UNO Academic Integrity Policy: “Academic integrity is fundamental to the process of learning and evaluating academic performance. Academic dishonesty will not be tolerated. Academic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to, the following: cheating, plagiarism, tampering with academic records and examinations, falsifying identity, and being an accessory to acts of academic dishonesty. Refer to the UNO Judicial Code for further information.”

The Code is available online at http://www.studentaffairs.uno.edu/policies.cfm

Students with Disabilities Students who qualify for services will receive the academic modifications for which they are legally entitled. It is the responsibility of the student to register with the Office of Disability Services (UC 260) each semester and follow their procedures for obtaining assistance. Please let me know if you will be seeking any special accommodations.

Course Schedule* & Reading Assignments

January 20: Course Introduction & General Data Sources

Data Resources:  National Conference of State Legislators: http://www.ncsl.org/  U.S. Statistical Abstracts: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/  State Politics & Policy Quarterly Data Center: http://academic.udayton.edu/SPPQ- TPR/index.htm

3 January 27: Variation in State Politics – Context & Culture  Gray & Hanson, Ch. 1  Dawson, Richard E. and James Robinson. 1963. “Inter-Party Competition, Economic Variables, and Welfare Policies in the American States”. The Journal of Politics 25 (2):265-289.  Johnson, Charles A. 1976. “Political Culture in the American States: Elazar’s Formulation Examined”. American Journal of Political Science 20 (3):491-509.  Hero, Rodney E. and Caroline Tolbert. 1996. “A Racial/Ethnic Diversity Interpretation of Politics and Policy in the States of the U.S.”. American Journal of Political Science 40 (3):851-871.  Lieske, Joel. "The Changing Regional Subcultures of the American States and the Utility of a New Cultural Measure." Political Research Quarterly 63 (3):538-52.  Frendreis, John, and Raymond Tatalovich. 2010. ""A Hundred Miles of Dry": Religion and the Persistence of Prohibition in the U.S. States." State Politics & Policy Quarterly 10 (3):302-19.

Data Resources:  Religious data: http://www.thearda.com/  Demographic data: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/  Frendreis & Tatalovich data: http://academic.udayton.edu/SPPQ- TPR/relig_prohib.html

February 3: Public Opinion & Policy Responsiveness  Wright, Gerald C., Jr., Robert S. Erickson, and John P. McIver. 1987. “Public Opinion and Policy Liberalism in the American States.” American Journal of Political Science 31 (4): 980-1001.  Berry, William D., Evan J. Ringquist, Richard C. Fording, and Russell L. Hanson. 1998. “Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the American States, 1960-93.” American Journal of Political Science 42 (1): 327-348.  Hill, Kim Quaile, and Angela Hinton-Anderson. 1995. “Pathways of Representation: A Causal Analysis of Public Opinion-Policy Linkages.” American Journal of Political Science 39 (4): 924-935.  Jacoby, William G., and Saundra K. Schneider. 2001. "Variability in State Policy Priorities: An Empirical Analysis." The Journal of Politics 63 (2):544.  Lax, Jeffrey R., and Justin H. Phillips. 2009. "Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness." American Political Science Review 103 (03):367-86.

Data Resources:  Erickson, Wright & McIver data: http://php.indiana.edu/~wright1/  Berry et al. data: http://www.uky.edu/~rford/stateideology.html  Policy Priorities 1980-2005 (see me for more recent data): http://polisci.msu.edu/jacoby/research/polprior/priorlist.html  Dynamic MRP Ideology Estimates (Juliana Pacheco): http://www.personal.psu.edu/jls644/blogs/jls644/

4 February 10: Direct Democracy – Effects on Policy  Gray & Hanson, Ch. 5  Matsusaka, John G. 1995. "Fiscal Effects of the Voter Initiative - Evidence from the Last 30 Years." Journal of Political Economy 103 (3):587-623.  Lascher, Edward L., Jr., Michael G. Hagen, and Steven A. Rochlin. 1996. “Gun Behind the Door? Ballot Initiative, State Policies and Public Opinion”. The Journal of Politics 58 (3): 760.  Gerber, Elisabeth R. 1996. “Legislative Response to the Threat of Popular Initiatives”. American Journal of Political Science 40 (1): 99-128.  Arceneaux, Kevin. 2002. “Direct Democracy and the Link between Public Opinion and State Abortion Policy”. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 2 (4): 372-387.  Burden, Barry C. 2005. "Institutions and Policy Representation in the States." State Politics & Policy Quarterly 5 (4):373.

Data Resources:  Bowler, Shaun, and Todd Donovan. 2004. "Measuring the Effects of Direct Democracy on State Policy: Not all Initiatives are Created Equal." State Politics and Policy Quarterly 4:345-63.  NCSL’s Ballot Measure Database: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16580  Initiative & Referendum Institute: http://www.iandrinstitute.org/

February 17: Direct Democracy – Minority Rights  Gamble, Barbara S. 1997. “Putting Civil Rights to a Popular Vote”. American Journal of Political Science 41 (1): 245-269.  Donovan, Todd, and Shaun Bowler. 1998. “Direct Democracy and Minority Rights: An Extension”. American Journal of Political Science 42 (3): 1020-1024.  Hajnal, Zoltan L., Elisabeth R. Gerber, and Hugh Louch. 2002. "Minorities and Direct Legislation: Evidence from California Ballot Proposition Elections." Journal of Politics 64 (1):154-77.  Haider-Markel, Donald P., Alana Querze, and Kara Lindaman. 2007. "Lose, Win, or Draw? A Reexamination of Direct Democracy and Minority Rights." Political Research Quarterly 60 (2):304-14.  Lewis, Daniel C. 2011. "Bypassing the Representational Filter? Minority Rights Policies under Direct Democracy Institutions in the U.S. States." State Politics & Policy Quarterly 11 (2): Forthcoming.

February 24: Direct Democracy – Voters, Participation & Politics  Lupia, Arthur. 1994. “Shortcuts Versus Encyclopedias: Information and Voting Behavior in California Insurance Reform Elections”. The American Political Science Review 88 (1): 63-76.  Nicholson, Stephen P. 2003. “The Political Environment and Ballot Proposition Awareness”. American Journal of Political Science 47 (3): 403-410.  Tolbert, Caroline J., Ramona S. McNeal, and Daniel A. Smith. 2003. “Enhancing Civic Engagement: The Effect of Direct Democracy on Political Participation and Knowledge”. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 3 (1): 23-41.

5  Dyck, Joshua, and Edward Lascher. 2009. "Direct Democracy and Political Efficacy Reconsidered." Political Behavior 31:401-27.  Stratmann, Thomas. 2006. “Is Spending More Potent for or Against a Proposition? Evidence from Ballot Measures”. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 788-801.  Phillips, Justin H. 2008. “Does the Citizen Initiative Weaken Party Government in the U.S. States?” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 8 (2): 127-149.

March 3: Elections – Turnout  McDonald, Michael P., and Samuel L. Popkin. 2001. "The Myth of the Vanishing Voter." The American Political Science Review 95 (4):963-74.  Tolbert, Caroline J., John Grummel, and Daniel Smith. 2001. "The Effects of Ballot Initiatives on Voter Turnout in the United States." American Politics Research 29 (6):625-48.  Donovan, Todd, Caroline J. Tolbert, and Daniel A. Smith. 2009. "Political Engagement, Mobilization, and Direct Democracy." Public Opinion Quarterly 73 (1):98-118.  Karp, Jeffrey A., and Susan A. Banducci. 2000. "Going Postal: How All-Mail Elections Influence Turnout." Political Behavior 22 (3):223-39.  Francia, Peter L., and Paul S. Herrnson. 2004. “The Synergistic Effect of Campaign Effort and Election Reform on Voter Turnout in State Legislative Elections”. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 4 (1): 74-93.  “Symposium: Voter ID Issues in Politics and Political Science.” PS: Political Science & Politics 42(1): selected readings: o Hershey, Marjorie Randon. 2009. "What We Know about Voter-ID Laws, Registration, and Turnout." PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (1):87-91. o Barreto, Matt A., Stephen A. Nuño, and Gabriel R. Sanchez. 2009. "The Disproportionate Impact of Voter-ID Requirements on the Electorate?New Evidence from Indiana." PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (01):111-6. o Vercellotti, Timothy, and David Andersen. 2009. "Voter-Identification Requirements and the Learning Curve." PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (01):117-20. o Mycoff, Jason D., Michael W. Wagner, and David C. Wilson. 2009. "The Empirical Effects of Voter-ID Laws: Present or Absent?" PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (01):121-6. o Ansolabehere, Stephen. 2009. "Effects of Identification Requirements on Voting: Evidence from the Experiences of Voters on Election Day." PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (01):127-30.

Data Resources:  Michael MacDonald’s Turnout Data: http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm  Voter ID Requirements: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16602#ak  Early & Absentee Voting Laws: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16604

March 10: No Class – Spring Break

6 March 16: Paper Proposals Due March 17: Innovation & Diffusion  Walker, Jack L. 1969. “The Diffusion of Innovations among American States”. The American Political Science Review 63: (3): 880-899.  Welch, Susan, and Kay Thompson. 1980. “The Impact of Federal Incentives on State Policy Innovation”. American Journal of Political Science 24 (4): 715-729.  Berry, Frances Stokes, and William D. Berry. 1990. “State Lottery Adoptions as Policy Innovations: An Event History Analysis”. The American Political Science Review 84: (2): 395-415.  Mintrom, Michael. 1997. “Policy Entrepreneurs and the Diffusion of Innovation”. American Journal of Political Science 41 (3): 738-770.  Shipan, Charles R., and Craig Volden. 2006. “Bottom-up Federalism: the Diffusion of Antismoking Policies from U.S. Cities to States.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (4): 825-843.  Shipan, Charles R., and Craig Volden. 2008. "The Mechanisms of Policy Diffusion." American Journal of Political Science 52:840-57.

March 24: Legislative Politics – Term Limits  Meinke, Scott R. and Edward B. Hasecke. 2003. “Term Limits, Professionalization, and Partisan Control in the U.S. State Legislatures”. Journal of Politics 65 (3): 898-908.  Lazarus, Jeffrey. 2006. "Term Limits' Multiple Effects on State Legislators' Career Decisions." State Politics and Policy Quarterly 6 (4):357-83.  Sarbaugh-Thompson, Marjorie, Lyke Thompson, Charles D. Elder, Meg Comins, Richard C. Elling, and John Strate. 2006. "Democracy among Strangers: Term Limits' Effects on Relationships between State Legislators in Michigan." State Politics and Policy Quarterly 6 (4):384-409.  Kousser, Thad. 2006. “The Limited Impact of Term Limits: Contingent Effects on the Complexity and Breadth of Laws”. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 6 (4): 410-429.  Carey, John M., Richard G. Niemi, Lynda W. Powell, and Gary F. Moncrief. 2006. "The Effects of Term Limits on State Legislatures: A New Survey of the 50 States." Legislative Studies Quarterly 31:105-34.  Wright, Gerald C. 2007. “Do Term Limits Affect Legislative Roll Call Voting? Representation, Polarization, and Participation”. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 7 (3): 256-280.

Data Resources:  Sarbaugh-Thompson, Marjorie. 2010. "Measuring "Term Limitedness" in U.S. Multi- State Research." State Politics and Policy Quarterly 10 (2):199-217.  Term Limits Overview: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=14849

March 31: Legislative Politics – Professionalism  Gray & Hanson, Ch. 6  Squire, Peverill. 2007. “Measuring Legislative Professionalism: The Squire Index Revisited”. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 7 (2): 211-227  King, James D. 2000. “Changes in Professionalism in U.S. State Legislatures”.

7 Legislative Studies Quarterly 25 (2): 327-343.  Maestas, Cherie. 2003. “The Incentive to Listen: Progressive Ambition, Resources, and Opinion Monitoring among State Legislators”. The Journal of Politics 65 (2): 439-456.  Berry, William D., Michael B. Berkman, and Stuart Schneiderman, 2000. “Legislative Professionalism and Incumbent Reelection: The Development of Institutional Boundaries”. The American Political Science Review 94 (4): 859-874.  Berkman, Michael B. 2001. “Legislative Professionalism and the Demand for Groups: The Institutional Context of the Interest Population Density”. Legislative Studies Quarterly 26 (4): 661-679.

April 7: Political Parties - Party Competition & the Nomination Process  Gray & Hanson, Ch. 3  Barrilleaux, Charles J. 1986. “A Dynamic Model of Partisan Competition in the American States’. American Journal of Political Science 30 (4): 822-840.  Holbrook, Thomas M. and Emily Van Dunk. 1993. “Electoral Competition in the American States”. The American Political Science Review 87 (4): 955-962.  Barrilleaux, Charles, Thomas Holbrook, and Laura Langer. 2002. “Party Balance, Electoral Competition and Welfare in the American States.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (2):416-427.  Gerber, Elisabeth R. and Rebecca Morton. 1998. “Primary Election Systems and Representation”. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 14 (2): 304-324.  Kaufmann, Karen M., James G. Gimpel, and Adam H. Hoffman. 2003. “A Promise Fulfilled? Open Primaries and Representation”. The Journal of Politics 65 (2): 457-476.

Data Resources:  Ranney Indices: Gray & Hansen various editions (see me)  Partisan Balance: http://academic.udayton.edu/SPPQ-TPR/klarner_datapage.html  State Primary Rules: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=20112

April 14: Courts  Gray & Hanson, Ch. 8  Brace, Paul, and Melinda Gann Hall. "The Interplay of Preferences, Case Facts, Context, and Rules in the Politics of Judicial Choice." The Journal of Politics 59 (4) (1997): 1206- 1231.  Hall, Melinda Gann. 2001. "State Supreme Courts in American Democracy: Probing the Myths of Judicial Reform." American Political Science Review 95 (2): 315-330.  Hall, Melinda Gann, and Chris W. Bonneau. 2006. “Does Quality Matter? Challengers in State Supreme Court Elections”. American Journal of Political Science 50 (1): 20-33.  Bonneau, Chris W. 2007. "The Effects of Campaign Spending in State Supreme Court Elections." Political Research Quarterly 60 (3):489-99.  Brace, Paul, and Brent D. Boyea. 2008. “State Public Opinion, the Death Penalty, and the Practice of Electing Judges”. American Journal of Political Science 52 (2): 360-372.

Data Resources:  State Supreme Court Data Project: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~pbrace/statecourt/

8  Chris Bonneau’s Replication Data: http://www.pitt.edu/~cwb7/ April 21: Governors  Gray & Hanson, Ch. 7  Barrilleaux, Charles, and Michael Berkman. 2003. “Do Governors Matter? Budgeting Rules and the Politics of State Policymaking”. Political Research Quarterly 56 (4): 409- 417.  Ferguson, Margaret Robertson. 2003. “Chief Executive Success in the Legislative Arena.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 3 (2): 158-182.  Klarner, Carl E. and Andrew Karch. 2008. “Why Do Governors Issue Vetoes? The Impact of Individual and Institutional Influences.” Political Research Quarterly  Carsey, Thomas M., and Gerald C. Wright. 1998. “State and National Factors in Gubernatorial and Senatorial Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 42 (3): 994-1002.  Cohen, Jeffrey E. and James D. King. 2004. “Relative Unemployment and Gubernatorial Popularity.” The Journal of Politics 66 (4): 1267-1282.

Data Resources:  Thad Beyle’s all things gubernatorial website: http://www.unc.edu/~beyle/

April 28: Interest Groups  Gray & Hanson, Ch. 4  Gray, Virginia, and David Lowery. 1995. “The Population Ecology of Gucci Gulch, or the Natural Regulation of Interest Group Numbers in the American States.” American Journal of Political Science 39 (1): 1-29.  Boehmke, Frederick J. 2002. “The Effect of Direct Democracy on the Size and Diversity of State Interest Group Populations” The Journal of Politics 64 (3): 827-844.  Gray, Virginia, David Lowery, Matthew Fellowes, and Andrea McAtee. 2004. "Public Opinion, Public Policy, and Organized Interests in the American States." Political Research Quarterly 57 (3):411.  Hogan, Robert E. 2005. “State Campaign Finance Laws and Interest Group Electioneering Activities.” The Journal of Politics 67 (3): 887-906.  Ozymy, Joshua. 2010. "Assessing the Impact of Legislative Lobbying Regulations on Interest Group Influence in U.S. State Legislatures." State Politics & Policy Quarterly 10 (4):397-420.

Data Resources:  Gray & Lowery Data: see me  National Institute on Money in State Politics: http://www.followthemoney.org/index.phtml

May 5: Federalism & Intergovernmental Relations  Gray & Hanson, Ch. 2  Bowman, Ann O’M., and Neal D. Woods. 2007. “Strength in Numbers: Why States Join Interstate Compacts”. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 7 (4): 347-368.  Nicholson-Crotty, Sean. 2008. “Fiscal Federalism and Tax Effort in the U.S. States”

9 State Politics and Policy Quarterly 8 (2): 109-126.  Wlezien, Christopher, and Stuart N. Soroka. 2011. "Federalism and Public Responsiveness to Policy." Publius: The Journal of Federalism 41 (1):31-52.  Malhotra, Neil. 2008. “Partisan Polarization and Blame Attribution in a Federal System: The Case of Hurricane Katrina”. Publius: The Journal of Federalism  Brown, Adam R. 2010. "Are Governors Responsible for the State Economy? Partisanship, Blame, and Divided Federalism." The Journal of Politics 72 (03):605-15.  Schneider, Saundra K., William G. Jacoby, and Daniel C. Lewis. "Public Opinion Toward Intergovernmental Policy Responsibilities." Publius: The Journal of Federalism 41 (1):1-30.

May 13: Papers Due