In attempting to explain state support of public higher education, this study develops a theory-driven, comprehensive conceptualization of the state political system within a larger theoretical framework that consists of state economic and demographic factors and higher education system attributes. Furthermore, although the higher education policy and finance literature has largely ignored the impact of interest groups on state policy and state support of higher education, they play a central role in the model presented here. The inclusion of politics in the explanatory model results in a more robust and pragmatically useful model.
Alt, J.E., & Lowry, R.C. ( 1994). Divided government, fiscal institutions, and budget deficits: Evidence from the states. American Political Science Review , 88, 811-828.
2.
Archibald, R.B., & Feldman, D.H. ( 2004). State higher education spending and the tax revolt (Working Paper No. 9). Williamsburg, VA: Department of Economics, College of William and Mary.
3.
Arellano, M., & Bond, S. ( 1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies, 59, 277-297.
4.
Bailey, M.A., Rom, M.C., & Taylor, M.M. ( 2004). State competition in higher education: A race to the top, or a race to the bottom?Economics of Governance, 5, 53-75.
5.
Bails, D., & Tieslau, M.A. ( 2000). The impact of fiscal constitutions on state and local expenditures. Cato Journal, 20, 255-277.
6.
Barrilleaux, C., & Berkman, M. ( 2003). Do governors matter? Budgeting rules and the politics of state policy making. Political Research Quarterly, 56, 409-417.
7.
Beck, N., & Katz, J. ( 2004). Time-series cross-section issues: Dynamics 2004. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Political Methodology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Retrieved August, 2008, from http://polmeth.wustl.edu/workingpapers.php?text=lagged+dependent+variable&searchkeywords=T&order=dateposted
8.
Berry, W.D., Ringquist, E.J., Fording, R.C., & Hanson, R.L. ( 1998). Measuring citizen and government ideology in the American states, 1960-1993. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 337-348.
9.
Beyle, T. ( 1999). The governors. In V. Gray, R. Hanson, & H. Jacob (Eds.), Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (7th ed., pp. 191-231). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
10.
Bibby, J.F., & Holbrook, T.M. (2004). Parties and elections. In V. Gray & R. L. Hanson (Eds.), Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (8th ed., pp. 62-99). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
11.
Bond, S.R. ( 2002). Dynamic panel data models: A guide to micro data methods and practice. Portuguese Economic Journal, 1, 141-162.
12.
Borghers, E., & Wessa, P. ( 2006). Online econometrics textbook: Statistics-econometrics- forecasting (Office for Research Development and Education). Available from http://www.xycoon.com
13.
Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. ( 2004). The initiative process. In V. Gray & R. L. Hanson (Eds.), Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (8th ed., pp. 129-156). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
14.
Browne, W.P. ( 1990). Organized interests and their issue niches: A search for pluralism in a policy domain. Journal of Politics, 52, 477-509.
15.
Carey, J.M., Niemi, R.G., & Powell, L.W. ( 2000). Incumbency and the probability of reelection in state legislative elections. Journal of Politics, 62, 671-700.
16.
Cigler, A.J. ( 1991). Interest groups: A subfield in search of an identity . In W. Crotty (Ed.), Political science: Looking to the future (pp. 99-135). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
17.
Coriat, B., & Dosi, G. ( 1998). Learning how to govern and learning how to solve problems: On the coevolution of competences, conflict and organizational routines. In A. Chandler, P. Hagstrom, & O. Solwell (Eds.), The dynamic firm (pp. 103-133). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
18.
Council of State Governments. (various years). The book of the states. Lexington, KY: Author.
19.
Council on Governmental Ethics Laws. (various years). Blue book. Jacksonville, FL: Author .
20.
Dawson, R.E., & Robinson, J.A. (1963). Inter-party competition, economic variables, and welfare policies in theAmerican states. Journal of Politics, 25, 265-289.
21.
Dorfman, R. ( 1979). A formula for the Gini coefficient. Review of Economics and Statistics, 61, 146-149.
22.
Dowding, K., & King, D. ( 1995). Preferences, institutions and rational choice. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
23.
Dye, T.R. ( 1966). Politics, economics, and the public. Chicago: Rand McNally.
24.
Education Commission of the States. (various years). State postsecondary education profiles handbook. Denver, CO: Author.
25.
Education Commission of the States. (2006). Postsecondary governance structures database. Retrieved July, 2006, from http://www.ecs.org/ecsmain.asp?page=/html/issuesPS.asp
26.
Elazar, D.J. ( 1984). American federalism: A view from the states (4th ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
27.
Ferrin, E.S. ( 2005). Tasks and strategies of in-house lobbyists in American colleges and universities. International Journal of Educational Advancement, 5, 180-191.
28.
Ferrin, S.E. ( 2003). Characteristics of in-house lobbyist in American colleges and universities. Higher Education Policy, 16(1), 87-108.
29.
Fiorina, M. ( 1994). Divided government in the American states: A byproduct of legislative professionalism? American Political Science Review, 88, 304-316.
30.
Fitzpatrick, J., & Hero, R. ( 1988). Political culture and political characteristics of the American states: A consideration of some old and new questions. Western Political Quarterly, 41, 145-153.
31.
Garand, J.C. ( 1985). Partisan change and shifting expenditure priorities in the American states, 1945-1978. American Politics Quarterly , 13, 255-391.
32.
Geddes, B. ( 1994). Politician’s dilemma: Building state capacity in Latin America. Berkeley: University of California Press.
33.
Geddes, B. ( 1996). Initiation of new democratic institutions in Eastern Europe and Latin America. In A. Lijphart & C. H. Waisman (Eds.), Institutional design in new democracies: Eastern Europe and Latin America. Boulder, CO: Westview.
34.
Gove, S.K., & Carpenter, J. ( 1977). State lobbying for higher education. Educational Record, 58, 357-373.
35.
Grafstein, R. ( 1992). Institutional realism: Social and political constraints on rational actors. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
36.
Gray, V., & Lowery, D. ( 1999). The population ecology of interest representation: Lobbying communities in the American states. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
37.
Heinz, J.P., Lauman, E.O., Nelson, R.L., & Salisbury, R.H. (1993). The hollow core: Private interests in national policy making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38.
Hendrick, R.M., & Garand, J.C. ( 1991). Expenditure tradeoffs in the U.S. states: A pooled analysis . Journal of Public Administration and Theory, 1, 295-318.
39.
Hero, R.E., & Tolbert, C.J. ( 1996). A racial/ethnic diversity interpretation of politics and policy in the states of the U.S. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 851-871.
40.
Hofferbert, R. ( 1974). The study of public policy. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
41.
Hofferbert, R.I., & Urice, J.K. ( 1985). Small-scale policy: The federal stimulus versus competing explanations for state funding of the arts. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 308-329.
42.
Holbrook, T.M., & Van Dunk, E. ( 1993). Electoral competition in theAmerican states. American Political Science Review, 87, 955-962.
43.
Jacoby, W.G., & Schneider, S.K. (2001). Variability in state policy priorities: An empirical analysis. Journal of Politics, 63, 544-568.
44.
Jensen, A.N. ( 2003). Correlation analysis. Retrieved November 1, 2006, from http://www.csus.edu/indiv/j/jensena/mgmt105/correl01.htm
45.
Judson, R.A., & Owen, A.L. ( 1999). Estimating dynamic panel data models: A guide for macroeconomists . Economics Letters, 65(1), 9-15.
46.
Kane, T.J., Orszag, P.R., & Gunter, D.L. ( 2003). State fiscal constraints and higher education spending: The role of Medicaid and the business cycle (Discussion Paper No. 11). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
47.
Kaplan, G.E. ( 2002). Between politics and markets: The institutional allocation of resources in higher education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
48.
Keele, L., & De Boef, S. (2004). Taking time seriously: Dynamic regression. Paper presented at the annual Political Methodology Summer Conference, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Retrieved August, 2008, from http://polmeth.wustl.edu/workingpapers.php?text=lagged+dependent+variable&searchkeywords=T&order=dateposted
49.
Keele, L., & Kelly, N. ( 2005). Dynamic models for dynamic theories: The ins and outs of lagged dependent variables. Retrieved August, 2008, from Society for Political Methodology Web site: http://polmeth.wustl.edu/workingpapers.php?text=lagged+dependent+variable&searchkeywords=T&order=dateposted
50.
King, J. ( 2003). Status report on the Pell Grant program. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
51.
King, J.D. ( 2000). Changes in professionalism in US state legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 25(2), 327-343.
52.
Kiser, L., & Ostrom, E. ( 1982). The three worlds of action. In E. Ostrom (Ed.), Strategies of political inquiry (pp. 179-221). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
53.
Koven, S.G., & Mausolff, C. ( 2002). The influence of political culture on state budgets: Another look at Elazar’s formulation. American Review of Public Administration, 32, 66-77.
54.
Layzell, D.T., & Lyddon, J.W. ( 1990). Budgeting for higher education for higher education at the state level: Enigma, paradox, and ritual (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 4). Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
55.
Lopez, E.J. ( 2003). Term limits: Causes and consequences. Public Choice, 114(1-2), 1-56.
56.
Lowry, R.C. ( 2001). The effects of state political interests and campus outputs on public university revenues. Economics of Education Review , 20, 105-119.
57.
Lowry, R.C. ( 2007). The political economy of public universities in the United States: A review essay. State Politics and Policy Quarterly , 7, 301-327.
58.
McGuinness, A.C. ( 2003). Models of postsecondary education and governance in the States. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
59.
McGuinness, A. (various years). State postsecondary education structures handbook. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
60.
McLendon, M.K. ( 2003a). The politics of higher education: Toward an expanded research agenda. Educational Policy, 17, 165-191.
61.
McLendon, M.K. ( 2003b). Setting the agenda for state decentralization of higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 72, 1-37.
62.
McLendon, M.K., Hearn, J.C., & Mokher, C.G. (in press). The politics of funding public higher education: A longitudinal analysis of influences on state appropriations patterns. Journal of Higher Education.
63.
McLendon, M.K., Hearn, J.C., & Deaton, R. ( 2004, November). Called to account: An analysis of state performance-accountability policies for higher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education , Kansas City, MO.
64.
McLendon, M.K., Heller, D.E., & Young, S.P. ( 2005). State postsecondary policy innovation: Politics, competition, and the interstate migration of policy ideas. Journal of Higher Education, 76, 363-400.
65.
McLendon, M.K., & Ness, E.C. ( 2003). The politics of state higher education governance reform . Peabody Journal of Education, 78(4), 66-88.
66.
Morgan, D., & Watson, S. ( 1991). Political culture, political system, characteristics, and public policies among theAmerican states. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 21, 31-48.
67.
Murphy, E. ( 2001). Effective lobbying strategies for higher education in state legislatures as perceived by governmental relations officers (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 62(06), 2049.
68.
National Association of State Budget Officers. (various years). Budget processes of the States. Washington, DC: Author.
69.
National Center for Education Statistics. (various years). Digest of education statistics. Washington, DC: Author.
70.
National Conference of State Legislatures. ( 2006b). Term limited states. Retrieved May 25, 2009, http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/about/states.htm
71.
Nice, D. ( 1984). Interest groups and policymaking in theAmerican states. Political Behavior, 6, 183-196.
72.
North, D. ( 1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance . New York: Cambridge University Press.
73.
Ostrom, E. ( 1991). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
74.
Ostrom, E. ( 1999). Institutional rational choice: An assessment of the institutional analysis and development framework. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 35-71). Boulder, CO: Westview.
75.
Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
76.
Peterson, R.G. ( 1976). Environmental and political determinants of state higher education appropriations policies. Journal of Higher Education , 47, 523-542.
77.
Plotnick, R.D., & Winters, R.F. ( 1985). A politicoeconomic theory of income redistribution. American Political Science Review, 79, 458-473.
78.
Pye, L.W. ( 1965). Introduction. In L. W. Pye & S. Verba (Eds.), Political culture and political development (pp. 6-15). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
79.
Rizzo, M.J. ( 2005). State preferences for higher education spending: A panel data analysis, 1977-2001. Paper presented at the Cornell Higher Education Research Institute’s annual conference, Ithaca, NY.
80.
Sabatier, P.A. ( 1991). Toward better theories of the policy process. PS: Political Science and Politics, 24, 147-156.
81.
Sabloff, P.L.W. ( 1997). Another reason why state legislatures will continue to restrict public university autonomy. Review of Higher Education , 20, 141-162.
82.
Sharkansky, I. ( 1969). The utility of Elazar’s political culture. Polity, 2, 66-83.
83.
Sharkansky, I. ( 1970). Policy analysis in political science. Chicago: Markham.
84.
Squire, P. ( 1992). Legislative professionalization and membership diversity in state legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 17, 69-79.
85.
Squire, P. ( 2000). Uncontested seats in state legislative elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 25, 131-146.
86.
Tandberg, D.A. ( 2006). State-level higher education interest group alliances . Higher Education in Review, 3, 25-49.
87.
Tandberg, D.A. ( 2007, November). Budgetary trade-offs and the politics of state funding of higher education. A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education , Anaheim, CA.
88.
Thomas, C.S., & Hrebenar, R.J. (2004). Interest groups in the states. In V. Gray & R. L. Hanson (Eds.), Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (8th ed., pp. 100-128). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
89.
Thompson, J.A., & Felts, A.A. ( 1991). Politicians and professionals: The influence of state agency heads in budgetary success. Western Political Quarterly , 45, 153-168.
90.
Truman, D. ( 1951). The governmental process. New York : Knopf.
91.
UCLA Academic Technology Services. (2006). Stata FAQ: How can I check for collinearity in survey regression? Retrieved November 01, 2006, from http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/faq/svycollin.htm
92.
Williams, R. ( 2005). Multicollinearity. Retrieved April 3, 2007, http://www.nd.edu/∼rwilliam/ stats2/l11.pdf
93.
Zumeta, W. ( 2004). State higher education financing: Demand imperatives meet structural, cyclical, and political constraints. In E. P. St. John & M. D. Parsons (Eds.), Public funding of higher education: Changing contexts and new rationales. (pp. 79-107). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
