Dimensions of State Politics, Economics, and Public Policy

A question often posed by students of American state politics is: “Do state political systems leave a distinctive imprint on patterns of public policy?†Prior to recent years the nearly automatic response of political scientists was an unqualified “yes.†More recent research has led to a qualified but increasingly confident “no.†Several recent publications have explored relationships between various indices of state politics, socio-economic characteristics, and public policy. The general conclusion has been that central features of the political system such as electoral and institutional circumstances do not explain much of the variation in policy. There are occasionally high correlations between individual measures of voter turnout, party competitiveness, or the character of state legislatures and some aspects of governmental spending. But these political-policy correlations seem to disappear when the effect of socioeconomic development is controlled. These are disturbing findings. They have not gone unchallenged. But the challenges, rather than reassuring those who have asserted the relevance of parties, voting patterns, and government structures, have demonstrated that the burden of proof now rests on those who hypothesize a politics-policy relationship. The problem has not been resolved. Part of the problem may rest on the conceptualization and measurement of the central variables. Electoral balance or alternation in office is not “inter-party competition,†except in the most mechanical sense. Compare Massachusetts' loose-knit party structure to the centralization of Connecticut's. “Party competition†is not the same as “party organization.†And party competition, voting habits, and patterns of apportionment fall far short of being equivalents of “political systems.â€