DOCSLIB.ORG

Whose Bills? Corporate Interests and Conservative Mobilization Across the U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Whose Bills? Corporate Interests and Conservative Mobilization Across the U.S Whose Bills? Corporate Interests and Conservative Mobilization Across the U.S. States, 1973-2013 The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Hertel-Fernandez, Alexander W. 2016. Whose Bills? Corporate Interests and Conservative Mobilization Across the U.S. States, 1973-2013. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33493552 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Whose Bills? Corporate Interests and Conservative Mobilization Across the U.S. States, 1973-2013 A dissertation presented by Alexander Hertel-Fernandez to The Committee on Higher Degrees in Social Policy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of Government and Social Policy Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts May 2016 © 2016 Alexander Hertel-Fernandez All rights reserved. Dissertation Advisor: Theda R. Skocpol Alexander Hertel-Fernandez Whose Bills? Corporate Interests and Conservative Mobilization Across the U.S. States, 1973-2013 ABSTRACT In recent decades, conservative groups have become increasingly active in mobilizing corporations to press their interests not just on the U.S. Congress and federal agencies, but also on legislatures in the fifty U.S. states. Why and how has such mobilization occurred, what accounts for its effectiveness in certain contexts, and what has been the response from liberal actors? To develop answers to these questions, this dissertation examines the rise and impact of one group – the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) – and two of its allies, the State Policy Network (SPN) and Americans for Prosperity (AFP), on the American political economy. Using a combination of archival evidence, interviews, and quantitative analyses, I document the ways that ALEC has developed especially effective strategies for negotiating the tensions inherent in coalitions between diverse businesses and political conservatives, and also how the group has exploited the low levels of policy resources available to lawmakers in many state legislatures. Next, I illustrate how the two newer networks – SPN and AFP – have bolstered ALEC’s efforts in the states. Using two important case studies – retrenchment of public employee bargaining rights and the implementation of the Affordable Care Act – I show how the strength and coordination of these three networks exerts an independent effect on the substance of state policy. I also discuss the reasons why left-wing efforts to construct a similar infrastructure of iii progressive cross-state lobbying groups have faltered. In the final empirical chapter, I look at the companies that have chosen to participate in ALEC and SPN. I find that above all, companies with greater threats from public policy were more likely to rely on these organizations. The second half of the chapter turns from explaining participation in ALEC to its effects on individual companies. My analysis shows that companies that participate in ALEC for longer periods of time are more likely to hold conservative policy stands and to exhibit less socially responsible labor and environmental practices. The conclusion summarizes the major contributions of the dissertation, and discusses its implications for debates about money in politics and political representation in an era of increasing inequality. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE i COPYRIGHT PAGE ii ABSTRACT iii TABLE OF CONTENTS v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi PREFACE 1 INTRODUCTION 7 CHAPTER 1: THE EVOLUTION OF A CORPORATE-CONSERVATIVE COALITION 25 CHAPTER 2: MAPPING THE DISSEMINATION OF BUSINESS POLICY PROPOSALS 82 CHAPTER 3: WHY LEGISLATORS RELY ON CORPORATE-CONSERVATIVE IDEAS 127 CHAPTER 4: A LITTLE HELP FROM THEIR FRIENDS 164 CHAPTER 5: FEISTY CHIHUAHUAS VERSUS A BIG GORILLA 213 CHAPTER 6: THE COMPANY YOU KEEP 240 CORPORATE-CONSERVATIVE MOBILIZATION AND AMERICAN DEMOCRACY 303 WORKS CITED 329 CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX 368 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX 374 CHAPTER 4 METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX 379 CHAPTER 6 METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX 385 v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Achieving durable political change across the U.S. states requires broad coalitions of diverse and committed supporters. The same, I have learned over the past six years, is true for dissertations. My committee members – Theda Skocpol, Peter Hall, Cathie Jo Martin, and Kathy Thelen – have each provided their own invaluable mix of encouragement and advice. Kathy helped spark an interest in political economy and inequality during my undergraduate years at Northwestern, and has been a terrific mentor ever since. Indeed, it was thanks to her that I saw Peter and Theda in action at a workshop on historical institutionalism in college – and decided that political science was where I wanted to be. After arriving at Harvard, Peter’s generous feedback helped me enormously as I developed the ideas for this dissertation (and its less- successful predecessor). Cathie has been a terrific sounding board and cheerleader throughout the whole process, even (and especially) during the dark days of the job market. None of this dissertation, however, would have been possible without my chair, Theda, who has taught me so much about the careful study of political organizations over time. It has been an incredible privilege to learn from – and ultimately collaborate with – her on our research related to the shifting U.S. political terrain. Her model of rigorous and civically engaged scholarship is a standard to which I will continually strive. Beyond my committee, I have received the very helpful advice of other scholars in writing this dissertation. Nick Carnes, Lee Drutman, Jacob Hacker, Steve Teles, and Rob Mickey were especially generous with their time and comments. I have also been lucky in the colleagues I have met in graduate school, who have provided me with emotional and intellectual sustenance – and made the whole experience fun. I have been so happy to call Kostya Kashin my roommate, coauthor, methodology guru, and friend. Volha Charnysh, James Conran, Leslie Finger, and Jeff vi Javed were the best writing (and moral support) group I could have asked for. Noam Gidron deserves special thanks for his generosity of feedback – and friendship. Even from across the country, Leah Stokes and Matto Mildenberger continue to provide support at just the right moments. Last, but by no means least, I am thankful for my family. Nate, my partner in everything, was patient and loving throughout everything that graduate school entailed. He knew exactly when to celebrate the victories and how to talk me through the harder moments. My Minnesotan family – Melissa, John and Anna – offered lots of encouragement and many wonderful escapes to sunny beaches. My sister Sarah’s courage and compassion has been an inspiration for me. And my parents, Adriela and Tom, have been behind me in everything I have ever done – from Super Saturday projects in West Lafayette church basements through to graduate school in Cambridge. They have been incredible role models and my hope is that this work reflects what they have both tried to teach me about the power of using social science to tackle big questions. This dissertation is dedicated to them. vii PREFACE Gene Whisnant is a genial retiree from central Oregon who loves to talk baseball. After 27 years of service in the Air Force, Whisnant decided to get involved in politics, and has served in Oregon’s lower chamber since 2003.1 Shortly after arriving in the legislature, Whisnant was approached by a former state senator, who encouraged him to consider joining a national association of legislators called the American Legislative Exchange Council (or ALEC, for short). Describing his longstanding involvement in that group, Whisnant smiles and proudly notes that while all legislators are automatically members of the non-partisan, non-profit National Conference of State Legislatures, he has made the decision to join and stay involved in ALEC on his own, readily paying the $50 dues required by the group each year. What makes Whisnant so proud of his participation in ALEC? He notes that the first thing to understand about what he gets from the group is how many state legislators in Oregon are actually serving only part-time, “working their tails off” to get anything done. And while he is retired, giving him more time to spend on the job as opposed to his younger colleagues, Whisnant notes that he does not have much help from expert staffers who could do research for him. His staff consists of his wife, who works half-time, and an aide who works three days per week when the legislature is in session (reported in Cole 2012). Whisnant’s situation is far from uncommon. In recent years, Oregon legislators were paid about $22,000 per year – hardly enough for a family to live on without a second job or another source of income. Though this may come as a surprise for readers not immersed in the day-to-day work of state politics, Oregon !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 This biographical information is from Whisnant’s interview with Travis H. Brown at the 2013 annual ALEC meeting. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RPdSvabMsk. 1 actually pays its legislators only a bit less than the national average in states that offered salaries to their members.2 The state ranks at about the national average for the number of staffers per elected official as well.3 Across the United States, many legislatures are run without much in the way of professional lawmakers or staff. Without that help, how does a state legislator like Whisnant with so few resources get the ideas, research, legislative language, talking points, polling, and expert witnesses that are necessary to make policy? That’s where ALEC comes in.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Culture Wars' Reloaded: Trump, Anti-Political Correctness and the Right's 'Free Speech' Hypocrisy
    The 'Culture Wars' Reloaded: Trump, Anti-Political Correctness and the Right's 'Free Speech' Hypocrisy Dr. Valerie Scatamburlo-D'Annibale University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada Abstract This article explores how Donald Trump capitalized on the right's decades-long, carefully choreographed and well-financed campaign against political correctness in relation to the broader strategy of 'cultural conservatism.' It provides an historical overview of various iterations of this campaign, discusses the mainstream media's complicity in promulgating conservative talking points about higher education at the height of the 1990s 'culture wars,' examines the reconfigured anti- PC/pro-free speech crusade of recent years, its contemporary currency in the Trump era and the implications for academia and educational policy. Keywords: political correctness, culture wars, free speech, cultural conservatism, critical pedagogy Introduction More than two years after Donald Trump's ascendancy to the White House, post-mortems of the 2016 American election continue to explore the factors that propelled him to office. Some have pointed to the spread of right-wing populism in the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis that culminated in Brexit in Europe and Trump's victory (Kagarlitsky, 2017; Tufts & Thomas, 2017) while Fuchs (2018) lays bare the deleterious role of social media in facilitating the rise of authoritarianism in the U.S. and elsewhere. Other 69 | P a g e The 'Culture Wars' Reloaded: Trump, Anti-Political Correctness and the Right's 'Free Speech' Hypocrisy explanations refer to deep-rooted misogyny that worked against Hillary Clinton (Wilz, 2016), a backlash against Barack Obama, sedimented racism and the demonization of diversity as a public good (Major, Blodorn and Blascovich, 2016; Shafer, 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Groups to Watch
    Groups to watch There is no question that conservative foundations and think tanks will put an increased emphasis on attacking public sector unions and public schools after the Supreme Court makes its decision in the Janus v. AFSCME case. They are already spending hundreds of millions of dollars across the nation to elect anti-labor and anti-public education candidates and to produce so-called "research," television ads and mailings to bash unions. The Koch network alone plans to spend $400 million this year.1 Virtually all of these organizations aren't required to report their donors. These groups try to bill themselves as pro-worker – they are not. They want to privatize our public schools, lower taxes for corporations and the wealthy, block access to health care, cut pensions, suppress voters, gerrymander and weaken the political power of unions. The tentacles of all of these group are already reaching into Minnesota, advocating for vouchers, more charter schools, defined-contribution pensions and the destruction of public employee unions. State Policy N etwork The State Policy Network (SPN) is a web of so-called “think tanks” that push a right-wing agenda in every state across the country, all while reporting little or no lobbying activities. The $80 million empire2 works to rig the system against working families by pushing for privatizing public schools, blocking expanded access to health care, lowering taxes for corporations and the very wealthy and undermining workers’ rights and unions. SPN and many of its affiliates are members of the controversial American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), where corporate lobbyists and special interest group representatives vote as equals with state lawmakers behind closed doors on “model” legislation that in many cases ends up benefiting the corporations’ bottom line.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Political Parties and Party Ideology
    Government Federal Political Parties and Party Ideology I Basics for the Teacher I Overview See Activity Sheet 4-2: Political Ideologies Discussed for the basics for This lesson is focused on devel- this lesson. oping knowledge of and understanding about the core political ideologies as they I Student Handouts evolved in the 20th century. The lesson is not intended to Activity Sheet 4-1: Your Political Compass create significant depth on Activity Sheet 4-2: Political Ideologies Discussed each ideology but to expose Activity Sheet 4-3: Political Ideologies Chart students to the range of politi- cal ideas that have some cur- Activity Sheet 4-4: Town Hall Meeting rency in modern politics. The lesson is also expected to aid in the refinement of existing polit- Instructions for the Teacher ical thought held by the stu- The curriculum you will teach is contained in the various handouts dents in your class. and answer keys contained in this lesson. Activity sheets provide background details, knowledge components, directions and assigned work. The materials developed for this lesson use a vari- ety of strategies but emphasize active learning and listening and I Objectives presentation skills to help prepare students. Access to a computer, at home or at school, will be an important component of these les- Students will: sons. However, materials have been provided to allow the teach- • Identify and understand ing of this lesson without classroom computer use - with the excep- the political platform of tion of some extension activities. each major federal party. • Understand the funda- Activity 1: Your Political Compass mental tenets of each fed- • This activity is designed to introduce the concept of political eral party’s ideology and ideology to the students and have them recognize that they place each party within have already formed a core of beliefs related to a political ide- the political spectrum or ology.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Other Election
    America’s Other Election Gary Gerstle It is time we reckoned with the cost of the country’s Trump obsession—not simply in distorting politics at the national level but in taking our gaze away from what is going on in the states. There, another election is being held in November and then another in 2018, and the stakes are high. Democrats and Republicans are vying to turn as many states as possible to their par- tisan advantage. Barring a collapse of the Trump campaign, Republicans stand to win many more of these contests than Democrats. 2016 States have again become what U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis ALL F Brandeis once called them almost a hundred years ago—laboratories of · T democracy. Battles on significant issues are being fought out within their borders: whether or not to legalize marijuana; whether or not to raise the issen D minimum wage; what restrictions can be placed on a woman’s right to an abortion; whether to preserve or curtail the collective bargaining rights of public-sector employees; whether or not transgender people will be allowed to use the bathroom of their chosen gender; whether small business own- ers must serve gay customers; how to reconfigure the electorate in terms of districting and protection (or lack thereof) of minority voting rights; whether or not states and cities should tax sugar and other substances harmful to health. That these battles are being waged with such intensity reflects the his- toric importance of the states in the American federal system. The federal government and the Supreme Court, in particular, reined in states’ rights in the 1960s, as part of their campaign to insure that minorities and women had full access to the liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study in Detroit
    education policy analysis archives A peer-reviewed, independent, open access, multilingual journal Arizona State University Volume 29 Number 21 February 22, 2021 ISSN 1068-2341 How does Teach For America Engage Its Alumni Politically? A Case Study in Detroit 1 Jeremy Singer Wayne State University United States & T. Jameson Brewer University of North Georgia United States Citation: Singer, J., & Brewer, T. J. (2021). How does Teach For America engage its alumni politically? A case study in Detroit. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 29(21). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.29.5943 Abstract: We describe the alumni engagement efforts by Teach For America (TFA) in Detroit as a case study of the specific ways that the organization works to influence its alumni’s involvement in educational politics and disposition towards particular types of educational reform. During the 2019-20 school year, TFA Detroit facilitated a series of “policy 1Statement of financial disclosure: As a graduate research assistant at Wayne State University, Jeremy Singer is partially funded by and supports research projects that are partially funded by a grant from the Skillman Foundation. Journal website: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ Manuscript received: 8/31/2020 Facebook: /EPAAA Revisions received: 12/3/2020 Twitter: @epaa_aape Accepted: 12/4/2020 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 21 2 workshops” for its alumni, intended to inspire TFA corps members and alumni to engage in political and policy advocacy. Combining field notes and other artifacts from the policy workshops with a social network analysis of the featured participants and central organizations, we show that TFA Detroit drew upon its local, state, and national policy networks to construct workshops that in turn would politically mobilize alumni to support their networks’ preferred city and state policies and reforms.
    [Show full text]
  • Threat from the Right Intensifies
    THREAT FROM THE RIGHT INTENSIFIES May 2018 Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 Meeting the Privatization Players ..............................................................................3 Education Privatization Players .....................................................................................................7 Massachusetts Parents United ...................................................................................................11 Creeping Privatization through Takeover Zone Models .............................................................14 Funding the Privatization Movement ..........................................................................................17 Charter Backers Broaden Support to Embrace Personalized Learning ....................................21 National Donors as Longtime Players in Massachusetts ...........................................................25 The Pioneer Institute ....................................................................................................................29 Profits or Professionals? Tech Products Threaten the Future of Teaching ....... 35 Personalized Profits: The Market Potential of Educational Technology Tools ..........................39 State-Funded Personalized Push in Massachusetts: MAPLE and LearnLaunch ....................40 Who’s Behind the MAPLE/LearnLaunch Collaboration? ...........................................................42 Gates
    [Show full text]
  • EUI Working Papers
    ROBERT SCHUMAN CENTRE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES EUI Working Papers RSCAS 2011/57 ROBERT SCHUMAN CENTRE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES EUDO - European Union Democracy Observatory FOUR FUNERALS AND A PARTY? THE POLITICAL REPERTOIRE OF THE ITALIAN RADICALS Claudio M. Radaelli and Samuele Dossi EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE, FLORENCE ROBERT SCHUMAN CENTRE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES EUDO - EUROPEAN UNION DEMOCRACY OBSERVATORY Four Funerals and a Party? The Political Repertoire of the Italian Radicals CLAUDIO M. RADAELLI AND SAMUELE DOSSI EUI Working Paper RSCAS 2011/57 This text may be downloaded only for personal research purposes. Additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copies or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper, or other series, the year and the publisher. ISSN 1028-3625 © 2011 Claudio M. Radaelli and Samuele Dossi Printed in Italy, November 2011 European University Institute Badia Fiesolana I – 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy www.eui.eu/RSCAS/Publications/ www.eui.eu cadmus.eui.eu Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies The Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies (RSCAS), created in 1992 and directed by Stefano Bartolini since September 2006, aims to develop inter-disciplinary and comparative research and to promote work on the major issues facing the process of integration and European society. The Centre is home to a large post-doctoral programme and hosts major research programmes and projects, and a range of working groups and ad hoc initiatives. The research agenda is organised around a set of core themes and is continuously evolving, reflecting the changing agenda of European integration and the expanding membership of the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • How Right Wing Funders Are Manufacturing News and Influencing Public Policy in Pennsylvania
    Driving the News How right wing funders are manufacturing news and influencing public policy in Pennsylvania A Report by Keystone Progress August, 2013 This report was produced by Keystone Progress. Keystone Progress is Pennsylvania’s largest progressive advocacy organization with over 350,000 subscribers. Keystone Progress embraces a pragmatic and flexible approach to advancing equal opportunity for all, the protection of individual freedoms, and democratic, transparent and people-oriented (rather than corporate) government. We support every worker’s right to organize and earn a living wage, every individual’s right to control their reproductive health options, every child’s right to public education, and every human being’s right to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and access adequate health care, food and shelter. [email protected] 610-990-6300 2 Executive Summary There is a disturbing new movement to supplant genuine investigative reporting with pseudo-reporting by right-wing advocacy organizations. These advocacy groups, posing as legitimate news bureaus, are well funded and have become accepted as objective news organizations by many mainstream newspapers, television and radio news operations. In fact, one such network claims that it is already "provides 10 percent of all daily reporting from state capitals nationwide."i This insidious infiltration of legitimate news operations is led by the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity. Its local affiliate in Pennsylvania is the Pennsylvania Independent. Key Findings . Despite its claims, the Pennsylvania Independent is far from being independent or unbiased. The Pennsylvania Independent is run by the far-right Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, which has close ties to the American Legislative Exchange Council, the Koch brothers, the Tea Party, the Conservative Political Action Conference, the Heritage Foundation and numerous other conservative causes and candidates.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 a Philosophical Analysis of STEM Education Dissertation Presented In
    A Philosophical Analysis of STEM Education Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jamie Eric Teeple Graduate Program in Educational Studies The Ohio State University 2018 Dissertation Committee Bryan R. Warnick, Advisor Michael J. Glassman Bruce A. Kimball 1 Copyrighted by Jamie Eric Teeple 2018 2 Abstract In this dissertation, I critique STEM education as the educational apotheosis of neoliberal governmentality and reconceptualize it for an egalitarian democracy. Part and parcel of this analysis is considering Wendy Brown’s (2015) contention that the contemporary subject is interpolated by the prevailing norms of neoliberalism as a governing form of political rationality and thus expresses itself not as a political subject, or “homo politicus”, but as a self-investing and economized subject, or “homo oeconomicus”. I hypothesize that students as emergent homo oeconomicus seek out STEM education as the best means for survival within a technocratic marketplace. In this sense, STEM literacy is rendered the paradigmatic form of symbolic capital within the capitalist state. The thrust of my critical response to this milieu figures left-libertarian or social-anarchist thought as the diametrically opposed and thus apposite ideological rejoinder to the right- authoritarian status quo, not only for political activism writ large, but also for educational reform proposals and even the preparation of preservice teachers. In the end, my research is an attempt to explore how students’ narratives can assist critical educators with leveraging pedagogy into a potent means for cultivating within educational systems the social imaginaries and political subjects needed to eschew the aims of a right- authoritarian status quo and embrace the aims of an egalitarian, left-libertarian society-to- be.
    [Show full text]
  • EXPOSED:The State Policy Network
    EXPOSED: The State Policy Network The Powerful Right-Wing Network Helping to Hijack State Politics and Government CENTER FOR MEDIA AND DEMOCRACY | ALECEXPOSED.ORG November 2013 ©2013 Center for Media and Democracy. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photography, recording, or by information exchange and retrieval system, without permission from the authors. Center for Media and Democracy ALECexposed.org | PRWatch.org | SourceWatch.org 520 University Avenue, Suite 260 Madison, WI 53703 | (608) 260-9713 (This publication is available online at ALECexposed.org) CMD, publisher of ALECexposed.org, PRWatch.org, and SourceWatch.org, has created a clearinghouse of information on the State Policy Network at sourcewatch.org/index.php/Portal:State_Policy_Network and a reporter’s guide to SPN at prwatch.org/node/11909/. Please see these online resources for more information. This report was written by Rebekah Wilce, with contributions by Lisa Graves, Mary Bottari, Nick Surgey, Jay Riestenberg, Katie Lorenze, Drew Curtis, and Sari Williams. This report on SPN is also part of a joint effort with Progress Now called www.StinkTanks.org, which includes information about what citizens can do in response to SPN's secretive influence on the state laws that affect their lives. Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 SPN’s Founding and Role in the National Right-Wing
    [Show full text]
  • Target San Diego
    Target San Diego The Right Wing Assault on Urban Democracy and Smart Government Lee Cokorinos Target San Diego The Right Wing Assault on Urban Democracy and Smart Government A Report for the Center on Policy Initiatives Lee Cokorinos November 2005 Table of Contents Acknowledgments . ii Foreword . iii Executive Summary . v Introduction: The National Significance of the Battle for San Diego . 1 1. The National Context: Key Organizations Leading the Right’s Assault on the States and Cities . 5 A. The American Legislative Exchange Council . 7 B. The State Policy Network . 13 C. The Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy . 17 D. The Pacific Research Institute . 21 E. Americans for Tax Reform and the Project for California’s Future . 25 F. The Reason Foundation . 33 2. The Performance Institute and the Assault on San Diego . 39 3. The Battle for America’s Cities: A National Engagement . 49 Endnotes . 57 I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Acknowledgments This report was made possible through the generous support of the New World Foundation. Special thanks go to Colin Greer and Ann Bastian of New World for their leadership in fostering the movement for progressive renewal. Thanks also to Donald Cohen of the Center on Policy Initiatives for contributing keen insights and the benefit of his ground level experience at engaging the right at every step of the research and writing, to Murtaza Baxamusa of CPI for sharing his expertise, and to veteran political researcher Jerry Sloan for his valuable advice. Jerry’s decades of research on the California and the national right have educated a generation of activists.
    [Show full text]
  • SSN Key Findings Hertel-Fernandez and Skocpol on the GOP Civil War Over Medicaid Expansion
    THE GOP CIVIL WAR OVER MEDICAID EXPANSION IN THE STATES by Alexander Hertel-Fernandez and Theda Skocpol, Harvard University The Affordable Care Act (also known as “ObamaCare”) funds the expansion of Medicaid in the states to include people just above the official poverty line. Although the architects of the original health reform law enacted in 2010 assumed that all states would participate in this expansion, the June 2012 Supreme Court decision upholding most of the law left states free to refuse the expansion without losing existing Medicaid funding. This turned the Medicaid expansion into a major political battle. Most Democratic-run states endorsed expansion quickly, but states with Republicans partially or fully in control have experienced fights pitting business associations that often favor accepting new federal Medicaid funding against ideological conservative groups determined to block all aspects of health reform implementation. As of fall 2015, twenty GOP-run or influenced states had not adopted expansion. Our research uses statistical models and case studies to explain state choices. We examine both endorsements by governors and official decisions about expansion, usually through enactments or defeats in state legislatures. Why Many GOP Governors and Business Groups Have Embraced Expansion Even in very conservative states, Medicaid expansion has often been supported by business groups and governors. By law, the federal government pays all costs for the first three years, and 90% of costs in 2020 and beyond. By accepting expansion, states receive millions to billions of dollars helpful to health care businesses, state budgets, and overall economic activity. In addition, hospitals and other medical care providers have extra incentives to support Medicaid expansion because, in the expectation that most low-income patients would gain coverage, the 2010 law gradually reduces payments to providers serving large shares of the uninsured.
    [Show full text]