Public Support for Professional Legislatures

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE State Politics & Policy Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-04-18 DOI:10.1017/spq.2023.6
D. Fortunato, Joshua McCrain, Kaylyn Jackson Schiff
{"title":"Public Support for Professional Legislatures","authors":"D. Fortunato, Joshua McCrain, Kaylyn Jackson Schiff","doi":"10.1017/spq.2023.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Evidence suggests that well-funded, professional legislatures more effectively provide constituents with their preferred policies and may improve social welfare. Yet, legislative resources across state legislatures have stagnated or dwindled at least in part due to public antagonism toward increasing representatives’ salaries. We argue that one reason voters oppose legislative resources, like salary and staff, is that they are unaware of the potential benefits. Employing a pre-registered survey experiment with a pre–post design, we find that subjects respond positively to potential social welfare benefits of professionalization, increasing support for greater resources. We also find that individuals identifying with the legislative majority party respond positively to potential responsiveness benefits and that out-partisans do not respond negatively to potential responsiveness costs. In a separate survey of political elites, we find similar patterns. These results suggest that a key barrier to increasing legislative professionalism – anticipated public backlash – may not be insurmountable. The findings also highlight a challenge of institutional choice: beliefs that representatives are unresponsive or ineffective lead to governing institutions that may ensure these outcomes.","PeriodicalId":47181,"journal":{"name":"State Politics & Policy Quarterly","volume":"23 1","pages":"327 - 339"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"State Politics & Policy Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/spq.2023.6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Evidence suggests that well-funded, professional legislatures more effectively provide constituents with their preferred policies and may improve social welfare. Yet, legislative resources across state legislatures have stagnated or dwindled at least in part due to public antagonism toward increasing representatives’ salaries. We argue that one reason voters oppose legislative resources, like salary and staff, is that they are unaware of the potential benefits. Employing a pre-registered survey experiment with a pre–post design, we find that subjects respond positively to potential social welfare benefits of professionalization, increasing support for greater resources. We also find that individuals identifying with the legislative majority party respond positively to potential responsiveness benefits and that out-partisans do not respond negatively to potential responsiveness costs. In a separate survey of political elites, we find similar patterns. These results suggest that a key barrier to increasing legislative professionalism – anticipated public backlash – may not be insurmountable. The findings also highlight a challenge of institutional choice: beliefs that representatives are unresponsive or ineffective lead to governing institutions that may ensure these outcomes.
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
公众对专业立法机构的支持
有证据表明,资金充足、专业的立法机构更有效地为选民提供他们喜欢的政策,并可能改善社会福利。然而,各州立法机构的立法资源停滞不前或减少,至少部分原因是公众反对增加代表的工资。我们认为,选民反对工资和员工等立法资源的一个原因是,他们没有意识到潜在的好处。采用预注册调查实验和岗前设计,我们发现被试对专业化的潜在社会福利效益有积极的反应,增加了对更多资源的支持。我们还发现,认同立法多数党的个体对潜在的回应利益有积极的反应,而认同党派外的个体对潜在的回应成本没有消极的反应。在另一项针对政治精英的调查中,我们发现了类似的模式。这些结果表明,提高立法专业性的一个关键障碍——预期的公众反弹——可能并非不可克服。研究结果还强调了制度选择的挑战:认为代表反应迟钝或效率低下的信念导致了可能确保这些结果的治理机构。
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: State Politics & Policy Quarterly (SPPQ) features studies that develop general hypotheses of political behavior and policymaking and test these hypotheses using the unique methodological advantages of the states. It also includes field review essays and a section entitled “The Practical Researcher,” which is a service-oriented feature designed to provide a data, methodological, and assessment resource for those conducting research on state politics. SPPQ is the official journal of the State Politics and Policy section of the American Political Science Association and is published by the University of Illinois Press for the Institute of Legislative Studies at the University of Illinois at Springfield.
期刊最新文献
SPQ volume 23 issue 4 Cover and Front matter SPQ volume 23 issue 4 Cover and Back matter Governing Through Gridlock: Bill Composition under Divided Government Are Initiatives an End-Run Around the Legislative Process? Divided Government and Voter Support for California Initiatives Assessing a New Measure of State Policy Mood: Response to Lagodny, Jones, Koch, and Enns
×
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