“The Ties that Bind are those that Punish: Network Polarization and Federal Crime Policy Gridlock, 1979–2005”

IF 3.3 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Social Forces Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI:10.1093/sf/soae052
Scott W Duxbury
{"title":"“The Ties that Bind are those that Punish: Network Polarization and Federal Crime Policy Gridlock, 1979–2005”","authors":"Scott W Duxbury","doi":"10.1093/sf/soae052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Largely overlooked in research on criminal legal expansion is the rise of political polarization and its attendant consequences for crime policy. Drawing on theories of intergroup collaboration and policymaking research, I argue that network polarization—low frequencies of collaborative relations between lawmakers belonging to distinct political groups—negatively affects crime legislation passage by reducing information flows, increasing intergroup hostility, and creating opportunities for political attacks. To evaluate this perspective, I recreate dynamic legislative networks between 1979 and 2005 using data on 1,897,019 cosponsorship relationships between 1537 federal lawmakers and the outcomes of 5950 federal crime bills. Results illustrate that increases in partisan network segregation and the number of densely clustered subgroups both have negative effects on bill passage. These relationships are not moderated by majority party status and peak during the 1990s and early 2000s, a period when prison growth showed its first signs of slowing. These findings provide new insight to the relationship between polarization and policy and suggest that increases in network polarization may be partly responsible for declines in crime policy adoption observed in recent decades.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"100 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Forces","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soae052","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Largely overlooked in research on criminal legal expansion is the rise of political polarization and its attendant consequences for crime policy. Drawing on theories of intergroup collaboration and policymaking research, I argue that network polarization—low frequencies of collaborative relations between lawmakers belonging to distinct political groups—negatively affects crime legislation passage by reducing information flows, increasing intergroup hostility, and creating opportunities for political attacks. To evaluate this perspective, I recreate dynamic legislative networks between 1979 and 2005 using data on 1,897,019 cosponsorship relationships between 1537 federal lawmakers and the outcomes of 5950 federal crime bills. Results illustrate that increases in partisan network segregation and the number of densely clustered subgroups both have negative effects on bill passage. These relationships are not moderated by majority party status and peak during the 1990s and early 2000s, a period when prison growth showed its first signs of slowing. These findings provide new insight to the relationship between polarization and policy and suggest that increases in network polarization may be partly responsible for declines in crime policy adoption observed in recent decades.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"束缚人的纽带就是惩罚人的纽带:1979-2005年网络两极分化与联邦犯罪政策僵局"
在有关刑事法律扩张的研究中,政治极化的兴起及其对犯罪政策的影响往往被忽视。借鉴群体间合作理论和决策研究,我认为,网络极化--属于不同政治群体的立法者之间合作关系的低频率--通过减少信息流、增加群体间敌意和创造政治攻击机会,对犯罪立法的通过产生负面影响。为了评估这一观点,我利用 1537 名联邦立法者之间的 1897019 个共同提案关系数据和 5950 个联邦犯罪法案的结果,重新创建了 1979 年至 2005 年间的动态立法网络。结果表明,党派网络隔离和密集分组数量的增加都会对法案的通过产生负面影响。这些关系不受多数党地位的影响,并在 20 世纪 90 年代和 21 世纪初达到顶峰,而这一时期正是监狱增长首次出现放缓迹象的时期。这些发现为两极分化与政策之间的关系提供了新的视角,并表明网络两极分化的加剧可能是近几十年来犯罪政策采纳率下降的部分原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social Forces
Social Forces SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
123
期刊介绍: Established in 1922, Social Forces is recognized as a global leader among social research journals. Social Forces publishes articles of interest to a general social science audience and emphasizes cutting-edge sociological inquiry as well as explores realms the discipline shares with psychology, anthropology, political science, history, and economics. Social Forces is published by Oxford University Press in partnership with the Department of Sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
期刊最新文献
Entering the mainstream economy? Workplace segregation and immigrant assimilation Defenders of the status quo: energy protests and policy (in)action in Sweden A room of one’s own? The consequences of living density on individual well-being and social anomie Can fertility decline help explain gender pay convergence? Double standards in status ascriptions? The role of gender, behaviors, and social networks in status orders among adolescents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1