Search results

Purpose and approach – This research explores gender and gender inequality in representation in state legislatures among African Americans, Hispanics, and white Americans. Using 10 states with the largest concentrations of African Americans in the population and 10 with the largest concentrations of Hispanics in 2003, a parity index was used to compare each race/sex group's share of each state's population with that group's share of seats in the state legislature. Parity ratios were also constructed for white women and white men in both sets of states.

Findings – White men dominate all the state legislatures surveyed here; white women are severely underrepresented as are Black women, Hispanic women, and Hispanic men. Black men are slightly but not greatly underrepresented in political office in these states. A consistent pattern is that the higher the representation of any group of males, the greater is the gap between women and men.

For Black and white women in both sets of states, having a high proportion of women who are college graduates, who are employed, and who work as managers or professionals and garner larger earnings increases their chances for election, but this pattern is not observed among Hispanic women.

Implications – These findings are significant because they bring together previously disparate insights from political science and sociology; highlight differences between women and men and among people from different ethnic groups; and reveal the importance of an intersectional approach for understanding the representation of diverse groups in political office.

This chapter examines the range of possible effects of ethics laws enacted by state legislatures. One objective of ethics law, to reduce corruption, cannot be demonstrated. Other objectives, to placate the media, defend against partisan attack, and permit the legislature to move on, have mixed results, while a final objective, to restore public confidence, is not achieved. Nevertheless, ethics law does affect the process, by somewhat discouraging legislator recruitment and retention, by raising the consciousness of legislators, and by changing the cultures of state capitals.

The imposition of term limits in bicameral (two‐chamber) state legislatures could produce unforeseen consequences in the policymaking process. Supporters of term limit rules have not considered that their imposition could fundamentally shift the sequence of policymaking in legislatures. This is important given that research on sequential bicameral policymaking suggests qualities of the lower chamber allow it to cultivate policy expertise such that the upper chamber will defer to the lower chamber in policymaking. This project aims to explore whether this proposed policymaking sequence exists in term‐limited states.

A comparison of policy adoptions in states with and without term limits is performed using an original data set on bill adoptions for all US bicameral legislatures that had a regular session between the years 2000 and 2006. Least‐squares regression models evaluate whether basic characteristics of legislatures are as relevant as term limit characteristics in explaining the level of outputs from the lower chamber in term‐limited states.

In states with term limits, the level of policy adoptions initiated by the lower chamber is lower than levels seen in states without term limits. This finding holds when controlling for other relevant variables that can potentially explain lower chamber productivity.

The study analyzes aggregate state‐level data and does not interview individual legislators in states with and without term limits on whether term limits can alter future legislative behavior.

This study is the first to examine whether the policymaking sequence differs between states that possess and do not possess term limit rules.

Little is known about the strategies used by state courts during the appropriations process. This article examines court budgetary practices in the state of Oklahoma. It reveals how court funding works in Oklahoma, what strategies are used by the state courts, and which factors are most important in determining the success of the courts in getting the funds they need. It shows that the judiciary is not necessarily at the mercy of the other branches of government when seeking resources. The findings provide the first glimpse at court budgeting strategies and determinants of these strategies’ success at the state level.

The purpose of this paper is to apply a novel intersectional framework, the heavy lifter theory, to leadership attainability in state legislatures. It is a logical and unique way to examine the gender ascription of Black women. This work helps to shed light on the political behavior of Black women, the institutional obstacles they face, and the lasting power of ancestral talent development.

One way to examine this intersectional theory, as it relates to Black women and authentic talent development in a sociocultural context, is an examination of leadership attainment in state legislatures. The specific research question was: What is the probability that Black women will attain leadership in state legislatures in comparison to Black men and white women? This study used panel data that have individual-level data on state legislators from 2007 to 2014 and applied a logistic regression and a predictive probability.

Intersectionality, measured as the interaction term between sex and race, increases the probability of Black women earning formal leadership positions in state legislatures. In addition, Black women attain leadership positions at higher rates than both Black men and white women.

This research presents a historical context by which to understand and examine the gendered nature of the ascription process of Black women. Specifically, their experience as a marginalized group burdened them with the duty of the heavy lifter. Although being the heavy lifter is a burden, this focus on Black women’s ability to thrive under constant discrimination in the form of racism and sexism should give scholars pause. In looking at Black women legislators’ ability to gain leadership, the heavy lifter identity can potentially be a vehicle through which Black women legislators can find a sense of purpose and both psychological and social strength to forge their own unexpected path.

The death penalty has existed in a state of steady decline for the last two decades, during which state legislatures have been at the center of abolition efforts. Successful abolition is, however, very rare in contrast to how often death penalty repeal bills are introduced across state legislatures, year after year. Indeed, abolition is not a sudden event, but may be many years in the making. Research on the early phases of this process, where the groundwork for enacted legislation is laid, is nevertheless limited. This chapter explores patterns of death penalty bill introductions across all active death penalty states from 1999 to 2018, providing not only an overview of legislative activity at state level but also an analysis of potential factors fueling the activity. It argues that individual legislators play a significant role in the current trend of increased legislative support for a restricted, if not entirely abolished, death penalty, evident both in terms of persistency over time and cooperation across party lines. It also problematizes partisan aspects of legislative activity in the context of legislation on capital punishment.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of changes to the Arkansas budget process brought about when the people of Arkansas voted to move from a biennial to an annual budget period in 2008. The paper describes the legislative changes necessary for annual budget review and explores the impact of annual budget review on revenue forecasting, supplemental appropriations, special sessions, legislative staff workload, executive branch oversight and state spending. This research assesses legislative perceptions of annual budget review across several factors including knowledge of the state budget, ability to check the powers of the governor and overall efficacy of annual budget review.

This exploratory research uses interview data from the Legislative Fiscal Director and data from an online survey of Arkansas state legislators. The interview and survey data were supplemented by an analysis of documents produced by legislative staff regarding supplemental appropriations, special sessions and state general revenue.

The Legislative Fiscal Director interview indicates that the change in budget period had little impact on revenue forecasting, special sessions and state government spending, with the exception that supplemental appropriations for Big 6 agencies increased in a statistically significant way following the advent of the fiscal session. The legislative survey finds that the change in budget period is viewed positively by Arkansas legislators. Most legislators indicated that they prefer annual budget review to biennial budget review.

Because of the exploratory approach, the research results may lack generalizability.

This paper surveys legislators on the efficacy of annual budget review which has seldom been done in previous research.

Legislative action was historically the means by which U.S. states abolished capital punishment, but such action ceased for decades following the Supreme Court's 1976 Gregg decision that reaffirmed the constitutionality of the death penalty. Despite the fact that several legislatures have considered abolition bills in the modern era, only three states successfully enacted such legislation. It is my purpose in this study to analyze why states are currently struggling to pass abolition legislation and to determine which factors contribute to success. I conduct a comparative, qualitative case study of New Jersey, the first state to legislatively abolish since 1976, and Maryland, a similar state whose abolition effort recently failed. I analyze the content of legislators’ debates about the abolition bills in committee and on the legislature floor, as well as news coverage of the abolition efforts in each state's largest newspapers. I reach two primary conclusions. First, an abolition bill is more likely to be passed by Democrats than Republicans, but unified Democratic control of the government is not a sufficient condition for abolition. Second, arguments about the risk of wrongful executions and the deleterious collateral consequences of the death penalty process on the family members of murder victims are powerful sources of political support for abolition, especially where doubts about the deterrent effect of the death penalty are widespread. This study reaffirms the central importance of the innocence frame in the modern death penalty debate, and it presents the first scholarly analysis of the collateral consequences frame. These findings may help activists in the abolition movement more effectively frame their arguments to appeal to legislators.

This paper examines the conditions under which states include sexual orientation as a protected status in hate crime policy over the course of 25 years. Previous research in this area has generally focused on the passage of either general hate crime statutes longitudinally or the inclusion of sexual orientation in hate crime legislation via cross-sectional analysis. Moreover, previous work in this area tends to concentrate on two types of factors affecting policy passage: (1) structural factors such as social disorganization and economic vitality, and (2) political characteristics including governor’s political party and the makeup of the state legislature. We argue that a strong LGBT social movement organizational presence may also influence LGBT hate crime policy passage. Using an event history analysis, we test how state-level social movement organizational mobilization, as well as the state-level political context, affect policy passage from 1983 to 2008. Our findings indicate that political opportunities, including political instability and government ideology, matter for the passage of anti-gay hate crime policy. We also find evidence to support political mediation, as the interaction between social movement organizational presence and Democrats in the state legislature affect policy passage.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role of women in the Georgia General Assembly and determines the impact of gender on the activities of state legislators, specifically in the areas of committee assignments and sponsored legislation from 2003 to 2014.

The approach set forth in this analysis seeks to answer four research questions employing quantitative data regarding female legislator involvement in activities of the state legislature and compare these findings with their male colleagues over a ten-year period.

Some of the key findings include that female representative sponsor fewer bills and participate in fewer committees than their male counterparts. The only legislative area female representatives exercise greater involvement is in government committees. The paper concludes with policy recommendations on how to address the current standing of women in the Georgia General Assembly.

A value of this analysis is that its content can support comparative work that can prove helpful to future research goals. As the most comprehensive analysis of its kind in Georgia, this paper contributes to a better understanding of the state legislature.