In the past 20 years, state attorneys general have reinvented the enforcement of consumer protection regulations. Prosecuting businesses through multi-state lawsuits has the effect of enforcing consumer protection laws at the national level. The participation of states in these lawsuits varies quite dramatically across states, yet little research has been done to explain these differences in consumer protection enforcement. Because state attorneys general are elected in 43 states, the electorate’s ideology and the state’s socioeconomic culture should help explain these discrepancies. A pooled time-series analysis of participation rates from 1989-1998 provides support for these hypotheses.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alfred L. Snapp & Son, Inc. vs. Puerto Rico. 1982. 458 U.S. 592, 601.
2.
Appleton, Lynn. 1985. “Explaining Laws’ Making and Their Enforcement in the American States”. Social Science Quarterly66 (December): 839-853.
3.
Barrett, Devlin. 2003. “States and Cities Challenge E.P.A. Air Pollution Rules”. Associated Press State and Local Wire, 27 October.
4.
Barrilleaux, Charles, Thomas M. Holbrook, and Laura Langer. 2002. “Electoral Competition, Legislative Balance and American State Welfare Policy”. American Journal of Political Science46 (April): 415-427.
5.
Beck, Nathaniel, and Jonathan N. Katz. 1995. “What to do (and not to do) with Time-Series Cross Section Data”. American Political Science Review89 (September): 634-647.
6.
Bernacchi, Michael. 1976. “A Regional Analysis of State Consumer Protection Budgets”. Journal of Consumer Affairs10 (Winter): 239-244.
7.
Berry, William D., Evan J. Ringquist, Richard C. Fording, and Russell L. Hanson. 1998. “Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the American States, 1960-1993”. American Journal of Political Science42 (January): 327-348.
8.
Bibby, John F., and Thomas M. Holbrook. 1999. “Parties and Elections”. In Virginia Gray, Russell L. Hanson, and Herbert Jacob, eds., Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis, ed. 7th edition. Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
9.
Brace, Paul, Kellie Sims-Butler, Kevin Arceneaux, and Martin Johnson. 2002. “Public Opinion in the American States: New Perspectives Using National Survey Data”. American Journal of Political Science46 (January): 173-189.
10.
Clayton, Cornell W.1994. “Law, Politics and the New Federalism: State Attorneys General as National Policymakers”. Review of Politics56: 525-553.
11.
Conlan, Timothy. 1991. “And the Beat Goes On: Intergovernmental Mandates and Preemption in an Era of Deregulation”. Publius: The Journal of Federalism21 (Summer): 43-57.
12.
Derthick, Martha, and Paul Quirk. 1985. The Politics of Deregulation. Washington DC: Brookings Institution.
13.
Epstein, Lee, and Karen O’Connor. 1988. “States and the Supreme Court: An Examination of Litigation Outcomes”. Social Science Quarterly68 (September): 660-674.
14.
Erikson, Robert S., Gerald C. Wright, and John P. McIver. 1993. Statehouse Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
15.
Ford, Gary. 1977. “State Characteristics Affecting the Passage of Consumer Legislation”. Journal of Consumer Affairs11 (Summer): 177-182.
16.
Gerber, Brian J., and Paul Teske. 2000. “Regulatory Policymaking in the American States: A Review of Theories and Evidence”. Political Research Quarterly53 (December): 849-886.
17.
Gormley Jr., William T.1983. “Policy, Politics and Public Utility Regulation”. American Journal of Political Science27 (February): 86-105.
18.
Gormley Jr., William T.1986. “Regulatory Issue Networks in A Federal System”. Polity18 (Summer): 595-620.
19.
Gray, Virginia. 1973. “Innovation in the States: A Diffusion Study,”American Political Science Review, 67 (December): 1174-1185.
20.
Gray, Virginia. 1999. “The Socioeconomic and Political Context of States,” In Virginia Gray, Russell L. Hanson, and Herbert Jacob, eds., Politics In The American States: A Comparative Analysis, 7th ed.Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
21.
Gray, Virginia, and David Lowery. 1996. The Population Ecology of Interest Representation: Lobbying Communities in the American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
22.
Gray, Virginia, David Lowery, Matthew Fellowes, and Andrea McAtee. 2004. “Public Opinion, Public Policy, and Organized Interests in the American States”. Political Research Quarterly57 (September): 411-420.
23.
Greenblatt, Alan. 2002. “Where Campaign Money Flows”. Governing: The Magazine of States and Localities16 (November): 44-46.
24.
Greenblatt, Alan. 2003. “The Avengers General”. Governing: The Magazine of States and Localities16 (May): 52-56.
25.
Hartford Fire Insurance Co. vs. California. 1993. 509 U.S. 764.
26.
Jacoby, William J., and Saundra K. Schneider. 2001. “Variabilities in State Policy Priorities: An Empirical Analysis”. Journal of Politics63 (May): 544-568.
27.
Kearney, Richard, and Reginald Sheehan. 1992. “Supreme Court Decision-Making: The Impact of Court Composition on State and Local Government Litigation”. Journal of Politics54 (November): 1008-1025.
28.
Kincaid, John. 1990. “From Cooperative to Coercive Federalism”. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science509 (May): 139-152.
29.
Lynch, Jason. 2001. “Federalism, Separation of Powers and the Role of State Attorneys General in Multistate Litigation”. Columbia Law Review101 (December): 1998-2032.
30.
Meier, Kenneth. 1987. “The Political Economy of Consumer Protection: An Examination of State Legislation”. Western Political Quarterly30 (June): 343-359.
31.
Morris, Thomas R.1987. “States Before the U.S. Supreme Court: State Attorneys General as Amicus Curiae”. Judicature70 (February-March): 298-306.
32.
Morales vs. Trans World Airlines. 1992. 504 U.S. 374.
33.
National Association of Attorneys General. 1989, 1990, 1991-92. Consumer Protection Report.
34.
Provost, Colin L.2003. “State Attorneys General, Entrepreneurship, and Consumer Protection in the New Federalism”. Publius: The Journal of Federalism33 (Spring): 37-53.
35.
Quaile-Hill, Kim, and Angela Hinton-Anderson. 1995. “Pathways of Representation: A Causal Analysis of Public Opinion-Policy Linkages”. American Journal of Political Science39 (November): 924-935.
36.
Ranney, Austin. 1976. “Parties in State Politics”. In Herbert Jacob and Kenneth N. Vines, eds., Politics In The American States, 3rd ed.Boston, MA: Little & Brown.
37.
Ross, Lynne, ed. 1990. State Attorneys General: Powers and Responsibilities. Washington, DC: Bureau of National Affairs.
38.
Sharkansky, Ira, and Richard I. Hofferbert. 1969. “Dimensions of State Politics, Economics, and Public Policy”. American Political Science Review63 (September): 867-879.
39.
Shevin, State of Florida ex. Rel. vs. Exxon Corp. 1976. F.2nd 266 (U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals).
40.
Sigelman, Lee, and Roland Smith. 1980. “Consumer Legislation in the American States: An Attempt at Explanation”. Social Science Quarterly61 (June): 58-70.
41.
Spill, Rorie L., Michael J. Licari, and Leonard Ray. 2001. “Taking on Tobacco: Policy Entrepreneurship and the Tobacco Litigation”. Political Research Quarterly54 (September): 605-622.
42.
Swinerton, E. Nelson. 1968. “Ambition and American State Executives”. Midwest Journal of Political Science12 (November): 538-549.
43.
Tierney, James (Former Maine Attorney General, 1981-1991). 2002. Phone Interview with Author, November.
44.
Trans World Airlines vs. Mattox. 1989. 712 F. Supp. 99 (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas).
45.
Trans World Airlines vs. Mattox. 1990. 897 F.2d 773 (U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals).
46.
Walker, Jack. 1969. “The Diffusion of Innovation Among the American States”. American Political Science Review63 (September): 880-899.
47.
Waltenburg, Eric, and Bill Swinford. 1999. “The Supreme Court as a Policy Arena: The Strategies and Tactics of State Attorneys General”. Policy Studies Journal27: 242-259.
48.
Witko, Christopher, and Adam J. Newmark. 2005. “Business Mobilization and Public Policy in the U.S. States”. Social Science Quarterly86 (June): 356-367.
49.
Zimmerman, David. 1999. “Why State Attorneys General Should Have a Limited Role in Enforcing the Federal Antitrust Law of Mergers”. Emory Law Journal48 (Winter): 337-366
50.
Zimmerman, Joseph. 1991. “Federal Preemption Under Reagan’s New Federalism”. Publius: The Journal of Federalism21 (Winter): 7-28.
