Governing Process
Toward an Understanding of the Political Economy of Using Field Experiments in Policymaking
Guglielmo Briscese & John List
NBER Working Paper, December 2024
Abstract:
Field experiments provide the clearest window into the true impact of many policies, allowing us to understand what works, what does not, and why. Yet, their widespread use has not been accompanied by a deep understanding of the political economy of their adoption in policy circles. This study begins with a large-scale natural field experiment that demonstrates the ineffectiveness of a widely implemented intervention. We leverage this result to understand how policymakers and a representative sample of the U.S. population update their beliefs of not only the policy itself, but the use of science and the trust they have in government. Policymakers, initially overly optimistic about the program's effectiveness, adjust their views based on evidence but show reduced demand for experimentation, suggesting experiment aversion when results defy expectations. Among the U.S. public, support for policy experiments is high and remains robust despite receiving disappointing results, though trust in the implementing institutions declines, particularly in terms of perceptions of competence and integrity. Providing additional information on the value of learning from unexpected findings partially mitigates this trust loss. These insights, from both the demand and supply side, reveal the complexities of managing policymakers' expectations and underscore the potential returns to educating the public on the value of open-mindedness in policy experimentation.
Physicians in Congress: Professional backgrounds and legislative effectiveness
Alexandra Fountaine, Michael Shepherd & Daniel Skinner
Legislative Studies Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
Despite a long history of physician service in the U.S. Congress, scholars have not yet provided a systematic study of physician members of Congress (PMCs) behavior once elected. Using publicly available data, the authors built a database of all PMCs, including years served, gender, and party affiliation since 1921, merging these data with information on PMC lawmaking activities since 1973. We show that, relative to other members, PMCs are substantially more likely to sponsor and have their health policies passed relative to other members. Further, PMCs are 66% more legislatively effective on health policy matters relative to other members. We show that these health policy effectiveness gains are isolated to health policy making and are not driven by committee assignments or ideological moderation. This work expands on the literatures related to the descriptive and substantive representation of occupational and economic class groupings as well as lawmaking effectiveness.
Deployed to the Hill: Military Experience and Legislative Behavior in Congress
Joseph Amoroso
Political Research Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
Congress is more polarized than ever. At the same time, there are fewer military veterans serving in Congress than ever before. Candidates with military experience, along with their supporters, argue that electing more veterans could help reduce dysfunction and gridlock. They claim that military values, such as duty and teamwork, translate into differences in legislative behavior. But are veteran lawmakers more effective than those without military experience? Are they more bipartisan? Using House data from the 104th to 116th Congresses (1995-2021), I examine the extent to which military experience influences a lawmaker's ability to legislate and engage in bipartisan behavior. I find that veteran lawmakers are more effective at advancing consequential legislation. Additionally, veterans appear more willing to collaborate with members of the opposite party, especially in recent Congresses. These effects are particularly evident among those who served on active duty. I conclude by considering the implications of these findings for maintaining healthy civil-military relations in America.
Exposure to Neighbor Adoptions, Agenda Setting Behavior, and Policy Diffusion
Todd Makse
Journal of Politics, forthcoming
Abstract:
Recent scholarship has downplayed the role of geography in policy diffusion, giving more attention to state similarity. Geography, however, still appears to be important for some policies and contexts, and we know less about its importance in influencing outcomes at stages prior to adoption, such as agenda setting. In this paper, I examine the extent to which geography plays a role in shaping the agenda-setting behavior that precedes policy adoption. Taking advantage of mismatches between state boundaries and media markets, I look at the agenda-setting behavior of legislators who have been "exposed" to policy adoptions in neighboring states. Drawing on a database of policy adoptions of thirteen criminal justice policies, I find that legislators exposed to out-of-state adoptions are more likely to author and sponsor these bills, offering a micro-level mechanism that substantiates the role of geography in policy diffusion.
Ends versus means? Ideology and support for repeals in the mass public
Nathaniel Birkhead et al.
Legislative Studies Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
An important, but poorly understood issue in modern American politics is the conservative wing of the Republican party's interest in repealing legislation. Although existing work shows that conservative Republican elites focus more on repeals than in past decades, it remains unclear what the public thinks about this governance approach. We examine this issue with a survey experiment asking respondents to evaluate four policy proposals in Congress, holding the "ends" constant but randomizing whether they are achieved by enacting a new law or repealing an existing law. Our results show that conservatives favor repeals as a legislative tool more so than liberals and moderates. We also show that this is the result of ideological, rather than partisan considerations. Our findings shed light on both the modern Republican party's approach to governance and a key issue at the nexus of mass attitudes, ideology, and legislative procedure.
Are Descriptive Representatives More Successful Passing Group-Relevant Legislation? The Case of Native American State Legislators
Elise Blasingame, Eric Hansen & Richard Witmer
Political Research Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
Descriptive representatives often sponsor legislation that advances their groups' policy interests, but it remains unclear how successful they are passing such legislation. Colleagues might defer and support group-relevant measures from descriptive representatives, perceiving them to have greater expertise and legitimate claims to address the issues than outgroup members. However, colleagues might also oppose those measures in an act of backlash against those groups (especially historically marginalized groups) making new claims on the political system. To answer the question of descriptive representative success, we review 3,401 pieces of legislation related to Native American issues introduced at the state level between 2010 and 2020. We find that measures related to Native affairs are no more likely to pass if sponsored by a Native lawmaker than if sponsored by a non-Native lawmaker. However, symbolic measures of Native concern are more likely to pass than substantive measures regardless of the identity of the sponsor. With more Native Americans running for office than ever before, our findings have important implications for considering the effects of increased descriptive representation in state legislatures.
Do Government Benefits Affect Officeholders' Electoral Fortunes? Evidence from State Earned Income Tax Credits
Hunter Rendleman & Jesse Yoder
American Political Science Review, forthcoming
Abstract:
When do public policies influence citizens' political attitudes and behavior, and among whom? We study this question using one of the largest social provision programs in the United States: the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). We exploit the staggered roll-out of state-level EITC programs to estimate the causal effect of the program on elections, voter behavior, and attitudes about the government. Contrary to predictions from the policy feedback literature, we show that the credit leads to higher vote shares and approval ratings for the implementing governor. These effects are temporally limited to the first years of the credit's availability and dissipate over time. Taken together, our results offer new insights about the conditions under which particularistic economic policies affect political outcomes.
Guilty by Political Association: The Impact of Political Scandals on Connected Firms
April Knill et al.
Journal of Law and Economics, November 2024, Pages 841-877
Abstract:
Over the period 1992-2018, we investigate the economic impact of scandal-tainted congresspersons on politically connected firms. Following the first media report of a scandal, firms connected to the scandal-tainted congressperson experience a relative loss in market value. The loss manifests through both a reputational spillover and a reduced effectiveness of the congressperson in granting political favors to firms. Our findings indicate an undocumented cost of corporate political connections -- the loss that occurs when a connected politician is caught up in a scandal.
Career motives of presidential appointees and agency communication across American states
Huchen Liu
Presidential Studies Quarterly, December 2024, Pages 481-502
Abstract:
Do the career motives of presidential appointees affect program administration? To answer this question, I examine the phased development of policy communication of the U.S. Farm Service Agency (FSA) across states from 2002 to 2018 based on an original collection of historical official websites. This is a rare policy context for examining why peer appointees administer the same programs differently. Linking the state-by-state development of FSA newsletters to the career trajectories of state executive directors (SEDs), the presidential appointees who lead state FSAs, I show that SEDs interested in elective office post-appointment are associated with faster institutionalization of newsletters. Examining these newsletters' content, I then show that SEDs interested in elective office or a career in advocacy include more participation-encouraging language in newsletters. These results suggest that appointees' career goals outside the bureaucracy can potentially expedite innovation in program implementation and enhance the delivery of government benefits to the public, with implications for selecting appointees to enhance bureaucratic performance.