Those
of us who report on state-level politics usually brag about how much
better it is than following Congress. On our beat, after all, bills
actually get passed and become law—unlike in D.C., where the Senate
can’t even vote for lack of cloture and the House just keeps reapproving
the repeal of Obamacare in some endless
Politico version of
Groundhog Day.
In state legislatures, deals get made, budgets get passed (even
balanced, if that’s your thing), and not every single issue is defined
by a Democratic-Republican split.
Turns out we’ve been overstating things.
A new study
shows that polarization—the
ideological gulf between the average Republican and average Democrat—is
growing in state legislatures. Political scientists Boris Shor
(University
of Chicago) and Nolan McCarty (Princeton University) combined survey
results from the Project Vote Smart office-holder questionnaire with
roll-call votes, comparing the average Republican and Democratic
lawmakers in each state. (The data are
available for
anyone to play with.) Their findings tell us that state legislatures
aren’t quite as polarized as Congress, but they’re moving in the same
direction. What’s even more interesting, though, is what polarization
actually means—and who benefits from it.
Here’s my take on what we can glean from the findings:
1. Most State Legislatures Are More Polarized than Congress
The gap between Democrats and Republicans in some state legislatures
isn’t just as big as in Congress—it’s bigger. The states with the most
polarization vary both in terms of geography and political persuasion.
Among the five states with the biggest divide are Democratic-leaning
states like California and Colorado, Republican-leaning states like
Arizona, and middle-of-the-road states like Washington.
Boris Shor, The American Legislatures Project
In the past, party was not the only indicator of where state
legislators fell on the ideological spectrum. Rural Democrats might
overlap with urban Republicans on social issues, for instance, while
urban Democrats and rural Republicans might agree on public-school
funding. Those areas of agreement are increasingly few. In 2013, if a
lawmaker supports affirmative action, odds are she also supports
abortion rights and a progressive tax structure. “If you tell me one
element of your beliefs, I can predict all the other elements of your
beliefs,” Shor says. “I’m gonna be right 90 percent of the time.”
One reason for the shift: increasingly, national groups call the
shots for Republican state lawmakers. Grover Norquist’s no-new-taxes
pledge, signed by 1,037 current state lawmakers, helped create a method
for nationalizing state issues. Groups like the American Legislative
Exchange Council (ALEC) have successfully pushed “model legislation” to
Republican lawmakers around the country, accounting for the
proliferation of voter ID laws and stand-your-ground laws, among others.
Increasingly, big-money conservatives such as the Koch brothers support
challenges to “moderate” Republican lawmakers on the state level to
enforce ideological purity. The Republican State Leadership Committee
(RSLC) spent around $30 million to elect GOP lawmakers in 2010 and
another $25 million in 2012. (Democrats are playing catch-up, having
spent nearly $11 million in 2010 and around $10 million in 2012.) In
many state-level races, a few thousand dollars can make an enormous
difference; the big national spenders help ensure that state lawmakers
will be more in line with the national agenda.
2. Polarization Doesn’t Always Mean What You Think
Polarization at the state level
doesn’t necessarily lead to congressional-style gridlock. For instance,
California has by far the biggest ideological gap between state
Democrats and state Republicans. But because Democrats thoroughly
dominate the state, it hardly matters; they can pass bills to force
fracking companies to be more transparent or help give flexibility to
transgendered students. Similarly, in GOP-dominated states like Texas,
Republicans have had little trouble passing a laundry list of
conservative legislation.
A bigger surprise: Less-polarized states are not necessarily more
moderate. Take Louisiana, which is one of the least polarized states
according to the study—because its minority Democrats are so
conservative themselves that the gap between the parties is very small.
On the left, Massachusetts also has a small gap between the parties; the
average Republican officeholder there is more liberal than the average
Democrat in Louisiana.
The legislation passed in those states generally reflects what most
voters want. That’s not true in heavily polarized states with closer
partisan divides. Wisconsin is among the states with an ideological gap
bigger than Congress’s. Even though the state votes blue in presidential
races, Republican Governor Scott Walker, along with a GOP-controlled
legislature, have successfully passed right-wing anti-union and voter ID
laws. Similarly, Pennsylvania’s Republican legislature passed voter ID
and an extreme brand of welfare reform, even as Democrats won statewide
on more moderate agendas. Michigan is another easy example, where GOP
legislature of the historically pro-union state passed right-to-work
laws designed to weaken the labor movement. It’s no coincidence that all
three states are Republican.
3. Polarization Helps Explain the Uptick in Conservative Legislation
It’s easy to argue that Democrats and Republicans are equally
responsible for the growing polarization. But who benefits the most from
ideological gaps? The study doesn’t attempt to answer this question,
but it gives us tools to understand why Republicans have more
successfully exploited polarized legislatures at the state level—just as
they have in Congress.
There’s no progressive equivalent to the power that right-wing groups
like ALEC and Norquist’s Americans for Tax Fairness have over
Republican lawmakers. These groups have been notably active in creating a
common conservative agenda across the states, promoting everything from
lower taxes and budget cuts to anti-union measures and voter ID. It
doesn’t hurt that Republicans dominate significantly more capitols,
thanks to their greater investment in state-level races. In 23 states,
Republicans control the senate, house, and governor’s office; by
comparison, Democrats control all three in only 12 states.
Voters in the Republican-controlled states aren’t necessarily
extreme—but the legislation coming out of them often is. In North
Carolina, Virginia, or Ohio, all battleground states at the presidential
level and all more polarized than Congress, the legislatures have
pushed far-right legislation. Ohio’s GOP legislature passed anti-labor
laws, only to see them repealed by voters through referenda. Virginia’s
pre-abortion sonogram bill prompted national outrage, while North
Carolina’s legislature, which first turned red in 2010, is slashing
benefits for the needy and pushing to pass voter ID. While Democratic
states like Maryland and California have pushed unabashedly liberal
agendas, both states are also left-wing bastions. Across the Midwest,
meanwhile, Republicans are passing extreme legislation in much more
middle-of-the-road places.
That’s possible, in part, because Republicans have another new
advantage. Progressives and conservatives have “sorted” themselves
geographically, so that Democrats tend to live in densely populated
cities while Republicans control more suburban and rural areas. Since
districts are drawn geographically, Democratic votes are too tightly
packed and count for less.
No comments:
Post a Comment