Conservatives reject identity politics as un-American, yet a distinct conservative identity has formed around issues of liberty, antagonism toward government, and local control. This identity has been connected to policies, first helping build the coalition necessary to pass policy and later shaped by policy implementation. Policy Feedback theory explains the mechanism that connects conservative politics, policy, and identity. This analysis applies a specific aspect of Policy Feedback theory to the case of school choice to understand how organizations frame issues and shape identity. Using interest group communications data, the findings show differences between and within homeschooling and charter school groups.
AuriniJ.DaviesS. (2005). Choice without markets: Homeschooling in the context of private education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26, 461-474.
2.
BaylorC. (2017). First to the party: The group origins of political transformation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
CampbellA. (2003). How policies make citizens: Senior political activism and the American welfare state. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
CooperB.SureauJ. (2007). The politics of homeschooling: New developments, new challenges. Educational Policy, 21, 110-131.
10.
GaitherM. (2008). Homeschool: An American history. New York, NY: Palgrave.
11.
GossK. (2010). Civil society and civic engagement: Towards a multilevel theory of policy feedbacks. Journal of Civil Society, 6, 119-143.
12.
GossK. (2013). The paradox of gender equality: How American women’s groups gained and lost their public voice. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
13.
GradyS.BielickS.AudS. (2010). Trends in the use of school choice: 1993 to 2007. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010004.pdf
14.
GrayV.LoweryD. (1996). A Niche theory of interest representation. The Journal of Politics, 58, 91-111.
15.
HackerJ. (2002). The divided welfare state: The battle over public and private social benefits in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
16.
HackettU. (2017). Theorizing the Submerged state: The politics of private schools in the United States. Policy Studies Journal, 45, 464-489.
17.
Haider-MarkelD.SylvesterS. (2014). Changing policies/changing hearts and minds: The evolution of the gay rights movement. In CiglerA.LoomisB.NownesA. (Eds.), Interest group politics (9th ed., pp. 68-89). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
18.
HalpinD.FraussenB. (2019). Laying the groundwork: Linking internal agenda-setting processes of interest groups to their role in policy making. Administration & Society, 51, 1337-1359.
19.
HeaneyM. (2004). Outside the Issue Niche: The multidimensionality of interest group identity. American Politics Research, 32, 611-651.
20.
HenigJ. (1995). Rethinking school choice limits of the market metaphor. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
21.
HenigJ.JacobsenR.ReckhowS. (2019). Outside money in school board elections: The nationalization of education politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
22.
HolyokeT.BrownH. (2019). After the punctuation: Competition, uncertainty, and convergent state policy change. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 19(1), 3-28.
JoslynM.Haider-MarkelD.BaggsM.BilboA. (2017). Emerging political identities? Gun ownership and voting in presidential elections. Social Science Quarterly, 98, 382-396.
25.
KirstM. (2007). Politics of charter schools: Competing national advocacy coalitions meet local politics. Peabody Journal of Education, 82, 184-203.
26.
KnutsonK. (2018). From identity to issue: Policy agenda and framing shifts within long-term coalitions. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 6, 281-302.
27.
KollmanK. (1998). Outside lobbying. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28.
LacombeM. (2019). The political weaponization of gun owners: The NRA’s cultivation, dissemination, and use of a group social identity. Journal of Politics, 81, 1342-1356.
29.
LaymanG.CarseyT. (2002). Party polarization and party structuring of policy attitudes: A comparison of three NES panel studies. Political Behavior, 24, 199-236.
30.
LewisA. (2017). The rights turn in conservative Christian politics: How abortion transformed the culture wars. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
31.
MarchettiK. (2014). Crossing the intersection: The representation of disadvantaged identities in advocacy. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 2, 104-119.
32.
MasonL. (2018). Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
33.
MelzerS. (2009). Gun Crusaders: The NRA’s culture war. New York: New York University Press.
34.
MettlerS. (2005). Soldiers to citizens: The G.I. Bill and the making of the greatest generation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
35.
MettlerS. (2009). The submerged state: How invisible government policies undermine American democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
36.
MichenerJ. (2018). Fragmented democracy: Medicaid, federalism, and unequal politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
37.
MurphyJ. (2012). Homeschooling in America: Capturing and assessing the movement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
38.
MurrayB.ThurstonD.RenzulliL.BoylanR. (2019). Civil society goes to school: Parent-teacher associations and the equality of educational opportunity. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 5(3), 41-63.
39.
NathanJ. (1997). Charter schools: Creating hope and opportunity for American education. San Francisco, CA: The Jossey-Bass Education Series.
PatashnikE.ZelizerJ. (2013). The struggle to remake politics: Liberal reform and the limits of policy feedback in the contemporary American state. Perspectives on Politics, 11, 1071-1087.
42.
PiersonP. (1993). When effect becomes cause: Policy feedback and political change. World Politics, 45, 595-628.
43.
RayB. (2004, January). Home educated and now adults: Their community and civic involvement, views about homeschooling, and other traits (Working Paper). Salem, OR: National Home Education Research Institute.
ReedR. (1993). Casting a wider net: Religious conservatives move beyond abortion and homosexuality. Policy Review, 65, 31-35.
46.
ReichR. (2002). Testing the boundaries of parental authority over education: The case of homeschooling. Nomos, 43, 275-313.
47.
RohlingerD. (2015). Abortion politics, mass media, and social movements in America. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
48.
SchneiderH.IngramA. (2012). Deserving and entitled: Social constructions and public policy. New York: State University of New York Press.
49.
SkocpolT. (1995). The political origins of social policy in US. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
50.
SossJ.SchramS. (2007). A public transformed? Welfare reform as policy feedback. American Political Science Review, 101, 111-127.
51.
SteidleyT. (2018). Big guns or big talk? How the national rifle association matters for conceal carry weapons laws. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 23, 101-125.
52.
StevensM. (2003). Kingdom of children: Culture and controversy in the homeschooling movement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
53.
StoneD. (1988). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
