State Partisanship Research Articles

Medicaid Managed Care Prior Authorization For Buprenorphine Tied To State Partisanship And Health Plan Profit Status, 2018.

Buprenorphine is among the most effective drugs for treating opioid use disorder, yet only a quarter of Americans who need it receive it. Requiring prior authorization has been identified as an important barrier to buprenorphine access. However, the practice remains widespread in Medicaid-the largest insurer of Americans with opioid use disorder. In this study, we examined how prior authorization for buprenorphine is related to plan structure and state political environment, using data on all 266 comprehensive Medicaid managed care plans active in 2018. We found substantial variation in prior authorization use across states, with all plans requiring prior authorization in eleven states and no plans requiring it in thirteen other states. We found that for-profit plans and those located in Republican states were more likely to impose prior authorization policies. Our findings suggest that managed care plans' decisions regarding use of prior authorization may be shaped by internal pressures to control costs, as well as by differing partisan stances regarding the need to prevent criminal diversion of buprenorphine.

Variability in Medicaid Coverage for Gender-affirming Surgeries Across U.S. States.

To describe the current Medicaid coverage landscape for gender-affirming surgery across the United States at the procedure level and identify factors associated with coverage. Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery differs by state, despite a federal ban on gender identity-based discrimination in health insurance. States that cover gender-affirming surgery also differ in which procedures are included in Medicaid coverage, leading to confusion among patients and clinicians. State Medicaid policies in 2021 for gender-affirming surgery were queried for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.). State partisanship, state-level Medicaid protections, and coverage of gender-affirming procedures in 2021 were recorded. The linear correlation between electorate partisanship and total procedures covered was assessed. Pairwise t tests were used to compare coverage based on state partisanship and the presence or absence of state-level Medicaid protections. Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery was covered in 30 states and Washington, D.C. The most commonly covered procedures were genital surgeries and mastectomy (n = 31), followed by breast augmentation (n = 21), facial feminization (n = 12), and voice modification surgery (n = 4). More procedures were covered in Democrat-controlled or leaning states, as well as in states with explicit protections for gender-affirming care in Medicaid coverage. Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery is patchwork across the United States and is especially poor for facial and voice surgeries. Our study provides a convenient reference for patients and surgeons detailing which gender-affirming surgical procedures are covered by Medicaid within each state.

State Higher Education Funding during COVID-19: Exploring State-Level Characteristics Influencing Financing Decisions

Building on research examining state financing for higher education, our qualitative comparative case study investigates state policymakers’ decisions for funding public higher education during the COVID-19 crisis in California and Texas. These states were purposively selected based on the size of their postsecondary sector, state partisanship, and higher education funding responses during the pandemic. Moreover, these states represent two of the largest public postsecondary enrollments nationally and serve a racially and ethnically diverse student population. Guiding our study is the Hearn and Ness (2018) framework investigating the ecology of state higher education policymaking, which offers four contextual categories that influence state policy decisions: socioeconomic context, organizational and policy context, politico-institutional context, and external context. This framework suggests underlying factors influencing the state funding process, while also providing an opportunity to expand on this theory through the unique COVID-19 context. We used deductive and inductive techniques to analyze 28 interviews with a range of actors, including state elected officials, state government staff, and higher education officials. We also examined 69 documents (state budgets, news articles, and state executive orders) to triangulate and verify our interview data. Two areas served as key events that ultimately influenced higher education funding decisions in California and Texas: (1) the preference of certain higher education institutions and (2) the availability and application of federal dollars. Furthermore, the organizational and policy context and the politico-institutional context, as defined by the Hearn and Ness framework, provided additional state-level factors that resulted in distinct responses. This study offers practical and theoretical contributions to higher education policy and practice, including highlighting the decision-making and prioritization processes of state policymakers when facing an unprecedented pandemic and crisis, and discussing common and unique factors influencing higher education policymaking in two different state contexts.

Governing in a Polarized Era: Federalism and the Response of U.S. State and Federal Governments to the COVID-19 Pandemic

How does the state of American federalism explain responses to COVID-19? State-by-state variations to the COVID-19 pandemic illustrate the political dynamics of “kaleidoscopic federalism,” under which there is no single prevailing principle of federalism. In the COVID-19 pandemic, features of kaleidoscopic federalism combined with shortcomings in the public health system under the Trump administration, leading to fragmented responses to the pandemic among the states. Federalism alone does not explain the shortcomings of the United States’ response to the pandemic. Rather, the fragmented response was driven by state partisanship, which shaped state public health interventions and resulted in differences in public health outcomes. This has sobering implications for American federalism because state-level partisan differences yield different and unequal responses to the pandemic.

State partisanship and higher education

This paper uses a regression discontinuity approach to estimate the causal effect of a governor’s party affiliation on higher education in the U.S. The findings indicate that when a Democrat wins a close race for governor, there is an increase in state revenues appropriated to associate’s-degree-granting colleges. There is also some evidence that minority-serving institutions receive additional state funds when a Democratic governor is elected. There is little evidence, however, that state partisanship affects other types of outcomes (e.g. enrollment).

In Search of Opportunity and Community: The Secondary Migration of Refugees in the United States

Each year the United States resettles thousands of refugees in pre-determined locations across the country. However, refugees are free to relocate upon arrival. Although this secondary migration can fundamentally alter outcomes for both refugees and the communities that host them, policymakers lack systematic data on this phenomenon. Using novel administrative data covering all adult refugees resettled between 2000 and 2014 (N≈447,000), we provide a comprehensive analysis of secondary migration patterns. A high proportion of refugees leave their initial resettlement site and migrate to a different state, although rates vary widely by origin, family ties, and arrival state. Importantly, secondary migration is driven primarily by the presence of co-ethnic networks and labor market considerations. We find no evidence that patterns of secondary migration are driven by state partisanship and the generosity of welfare benefits.

States, water, and climate: Who’s planning for change?

The primary objective of this study is to determine what drives states to plan for the impacts of a changing climate. As the climate continues to change, climate scientists have projected changes in water quantities available for human and other uses. This quantitative study examines how state water plans and state hazard mitigation plans address climate change. Plans were coded for the extent to which they address climate change in their calculations regarding future water supply and demand. Ordinal logistic regression models were developed to test the predictive value of independent variables including statewide voting, vulnerability to climate change, and recent experience with droughts and natural disasters. The most significant predictor variable for both state water planning and state hazard mitigation planning was state partisanship. Democratic leaning states were much more likely to include climate change in their plans than were Republican leaning states.

Definitely Not Moralistic: State Political Culture and Support for Donald Trump in the Race for the 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination

ABSTRACTThis study analyzes the important role state political culture played in the race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. Donald Trump appealed to demographically distinct types of voters in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries and caucuses that varied considerably from previous Republican presidential nominees. Relative to the demographics of the primary electorates, however, this study finds that state political culture played an outsized role in determining Donald Trump’s relative level of support in a particular state. When state demographics are utilized in ordinary least squares regression models as independent variables with state partisanship and Daniel Elazar’s state political culture typology, political culture proves to be a significant determinant of the level of support given to Trump in a state. States that are characterized by a more moralistic political culture are considerably more likely to have given Trump a lower share of the vote while voters in states that are characterized by a more traditionalistic or individualistic culture were more likely to support Trump.

State Partisanship and Climate Change Policy in the United States

현재 미국 연방 및 주정부의 기후 변화 정책은 수십년 간에 걸쳐 정책 결정자들의 논의 끝에 나온 결과물이다. 그러나, 미국 전역에 포괄적으로 적용되는 범국가적인 정책 해법은 아직까지 마련되지 않은 상태이다. 미국 의회에서의 당파성에 기반을 두고 있는 이러한 정체 현상이 연방 정부 차원의 기후 변화 관련 정책을 수립하지 못하고 있는 가장 큰 이유로 여겨지고 있다. 이와 같은 이유로, 주 정부 차원에서는 다수의 혁신적인 정책 수단이 채택되었으나, 그 제도의 종류는 주별로 크게 다르다. 주별로 기후변화 및 환경 관련 그리고 재생에너지 정책의 정도 (程度) 차이를 가져오는 다양한 경제적, 사회적 요인이 있겠으나, 본 논문은 그 중에서도 기후변화 정책과 주 정부 당파성 간의 연관성을 분석한다. 본 논문의 주된 가설은 민주당이 우세하게 집권하고 있는 주 정부일수록 기후변화 정책과 제도를 채택할 가능성이 높다는 것이다. 본 논문은 미국 내 50개주의 재생에너지발전 의무비율할당제 (Renewable Portfolio Standards, RPS), 요금 상계제도 (Net Metering), 연계 기준 정책 (Interconnection Standards), 공익기금 (Public Benefit Funds), 에너지효율성 향상 의무화 제도(Energy Efficiency Resource Standards, EERS), 세제 지원 (Property and sales tax incentives) 제도 채택 결과를 검토한다. 본 논문의 분석 연구는 몇몇 정책과 주는 예외적으로 패턴에 속하지 않지만, 민주당이 우세하게 집권하고 있는 정부일수록 전반적으로 기후변화 정책을 채택할 가능성이 높음을 시사한다.

Public Opinion in the U.S. States: 1956 to 2010

AbstractIn this article, we create, validate, and analyze new dynamic measures of state partisanship, state policy mood, and state political ideology. The measures of partisanship and policy mood begin in 1956 and the measure of ideology begins in 1976. Our approach uses the advantages of two leading techniques for measuring state public opinion—multilevel regression and poststratification (MRP) and survey aggregation. The resulting estimates are based on nearly 500 different surveys with a total of more than 740,000 respondents. After validating our measures, we show that during the last half century, policy preferences in the states have shifted in important and sometimes surprising ways. For example, we find that differences in political attitudes across time can be as important as differences across states.

Governance and Educational Expectations in the U.S. States

AbstractThis article analyzes the relationship between U.S. state governance and policies designed to enhance educational expectations. It examines three policy areas: state participation in voluntary National Assessment of Educational Progress testing, state testing requirements for new teachers, and state high school graduation requirements in math and science. In general, it identifies associations between state institutional and political characteristics and the state policies under study. In particular, state policies that impose higher demands on local school districts are more likely to be present in states with more centralized control of their K–12 systems. Furthermore, state partisanship appears to suggest that Republicans favor policies that push power to lower levels of the U.S. intergovernmental system.

Using National Surveys to Measure Dynamic U.S. State Public Opinion: A Guideline for Scholars and an Application

AbstractThe author improves on the measurement of U.S. state public opinion by (1) applying previous methods used only on cross-sectional data to create dynamic measures of state public opinion and (2) providing a systematic comparison of the performance of the various methodological approaches on these dynamic measures. The author shows that scholars can use multilevel regression, imputation, and poststratification (MRP) coupled with a simple moving average to measure state public opinion over time. Compared to aggregation, the MRP approach has less error and is more reliable, particularly for the less populated states. The author shows the applicability of the MRP approach by measuring and validating state partisanship and state ideology over time. The validated measures are available for public use. Armed with a method to measure state public opinion over time, scholars can begin to more fully understand the dynamic relationship between public opinion and policy in the U.S. states.

Institutional Change and the Electoral Connection in the Senate

The author argues that direct election intensified existing electoral incentives in the early-twentieth-century Senate, shifting the audience for senators' reelection efforts with measurable behavioral consequences. The author examines patterns of bill sponsorship, roll-call participation, and party voting in the decades surrounding the Seventeenth Amendment's ratification, a time when originally elected and originally selected senators served side by side. The author finds evidence of increased sponsorship and participation among originally elected senators. Comparing behavioral patterns before and after the constitutional amendment also reveals other important behavioral shifts toward a mass audience in the post-amendment period, including a tendency to increase constituency bill sponsorship immediately before reelection and a strengthening of the link between state partisanship and senators' party support voting.

“Divided Government” in State Executive Branches

The study of “divided government” has focused on the split partisan control of executive and legislative branches. The concept of divided government can also be applied to the study of state executive branches. There is no plausible reason for state electorates to prefer one party for governor and the opposing party for other state executive branch officials, yet many states have a governor of one party, while several of the state executive branch officers are of the opposing party. This study examines the extent of divided executive branches in state politics. Incumbency, state partisanship, and the changing nature of Southern politics affect levels of divisiveness in state executive branches. Electoral features do not affect levels of divisiveness. The data comprises states that have separately elected state executive officers between the years 1968 and 1993.

Strategic Candidate Decisionmaking and Competition in Gubernatorial Nonincumbent-Party Primaries

AbstractIn contrast to research on congressional and state legislative elections, strategic entry into gubernatorial contests has been largely unexplored. We examine the influence of incumbency, gubernatorial popularity, and other factors on candidate strategic decisions and the resulting level of competition in nonincumbent-party gubernatorial primaries between 1974 and 2000. We find that incumbency and gubernatorial popularity interact in their effect, with popular incumbents discouraging competition and unpopular incumbents encouraging it. The size of the potential candidate pool, the condition of the state economy, state partisanship, and state party endorsement practices also influence competition.

Running on Their Own

Senators who first reach office by gubernatorial appointment are successful at the polls at half the rate of incumbents in general. Outcomes of elections featuring appointed senators are affected by the incumbent's voting record in the Senate, the divisiveness of the primary, state partisanship, the size of the state, national political conditions, and the quality of the challenger. This last factor is the key to understanding the anomaly, as appointed senators face higher quality challengers than do senators who first gain office through the electoral process.

The Impact of State Party Elite Ideology

This study looks at the impact of state party elite ideology in American state politics. Drawing on the spatial theory of Anthony Downs, we develop hypotheses first to explain the non-convergence of candidates. Party elites are ideologically distinct, influential and strongly policy motivated. They are a force pulling candidates away from the average voter in varying degrees across the states. Second, elites influence public policy. Although the single greatest influence on the general liberalism- conservatism of state policy is public opinion, the ideological tendencies of the party elites have an important added impact. Finally, we examine the long-term impact of party elite ideology on state partisanship. We find that ideological extremism loses party identifiers; across the states, the ideological tendencies of party elites, relative to public opinion, is an important influence on state partisanship. Party elites, particularly the policy motivated activists, are an important force shaping politics in the states.

Measuring State Partisanship and Ideology with Survey Data

The study of state politics has suffered because of the lack of good data on major political orientations at the state level. This paper briefly discusses this problem and the need for survey-based measures, and then presents sets of estimates of state partisanship and ideology. These are derived from aggregating CBS News-New York Times polls at the state level. Using fifty-one polls taken from 1974 through 1982, our estimates are based on over 76,000 respondents. The estimates are shown to have good overall validity and reliability, and should prove valuable in studies of comparative state elections and policymaking.

Party composition in the American states: Clarifying concepts and explaining changes in partisanship since the 1950s

Students of state politics have long been interested in the partisanship and the degree of interparty competition in the American states. This has led to numerous attempts to quantify state-level partisanship and competition, the most significant by Ranney (1965). Interestingly, however, scholars have never specified clearly the relationship between these two concepts as measured by the Ranney index. This research attempts to do just that and reveals that the two are different measures which are related systematically. More important, understanding changes in a state's partisanship is determined to be crucial to understanding changes in its level of two-party competition. As such, in order to explain changes in partisanship and competition across the American states from the 1950s to the 1970s, we focus on accounting for changes in partisanship. To this end, changes in aggregate demographic variables account very well for states' movement along the Ranney index over the last 3 decades.

Ideological Stability and Change at the Presidential Nominating Conventions

Previous articleNext article No AccessResearch NotesIdeological Stability and Change at the Presidential Nominating ConventionsDavid NiceDavid Nice Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Politics Volume 42, Number 3Aug., 1980 Sponsored by the Southern Political Science Association Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2307/2130556 Views: 4Total views on this site Citations: 2Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1980 Southern Political Science AssociationPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:David C. Nice State Regulation of Employee Drug Testing Laboratories, Review of Public Personnel Administration 11, no.33 (Jul 1991): 66–78.https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X9101100305 Gerald C. Wright , Robert S. Erikson , and John P. McIver Measuring State Partisanship and Ideology with Survey Data, The Journal of Politics 47, no.22 (Oct 2015): 469–489.https://doi.org/10.2307/2130892