What factors influence agenda setting behavior in state legislatures in the United States? Using the localized effects of climate change, we examine whether notable changes in temperature can raise the salience of the issue, thus encouraging a legislative response. To evaluate the behavior of individual legislators around climate policy, we utilize an original data set that includes geographic mapping of climate anomalies at the state legislative district level and incorporates individual, chamber, district, and state characteristics to predict climate bill sponsorship. Using a multilevel model that estimates climate change bill sponsorship among 25,000 legislators from 2011 to 2015, we find a robust relationship between temperature anomalies and bill sponsorship for Democratic members of state legislators while Republicans are unresponsive to such factors. Our data and methodological approach allow us to examine legislative action on climate change beyond final policy passage and offers an opportunity to understand the motivations behind climate innovation in the American states.
BarnesTiffany D.2016. Gendering Legislative Behavior: Institutional Constraints and Collaboration in Argentina. New York: Cambridge University Press.
2.
BaumgartnerFrank R.JonesBryan D. 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
BenegalSalil D.2018. “The Spillover of Race and Racial Attitudes into Public Opinion about Climate Change.” Environmental Politics27 (4): 733–56.
4.
BenegalSalil D.ScruggsLyle A. 2018. “Correcting Misinformation about Climate Change: The Impact of Partisanship in an Experimental Setting.” Climatic Change148 (1–2): 61–80.
5.
BergquistParrishWarshawChristopher. 2019. “Does Global Warming Increase Public Concern about Climate Change?” The Journal of Politics. doi: 10.1086/701766.
6.
BirklandThomas A. 1997. After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing Events. Washington, DC, US: Georgetown University Press.
7.
BorickChristopher P.RabeBarry G. 2010. “A Reason to Believe: Examining the Factors That Determine Individual Views on Global Warming.” Social Science Quarterly91: 777–800.
8.
BorickChristopher P.RabeBarry G. 2014. “Weather or Not? Examining the Impact of Meteorological Conditions on Public Opinion regarding Global Warming.” Weather, Climate, and Society6 (3): 413–24.
9.
BoussalisConstantineCoanTravis G. 2016. “Text-Mining the Signals of Climate Change Doubt.” Global Environmental Change36: 89–100.
10.
BoussalisConstantineCoanTravis G.HolmanMirya R. 2018. “Climate Change Communication from Cities in the USA.” Climatic Change149 (2): 173–87. doi: 10.1007/s10584-018-2223-1.
11.
BoussalisConstantineCoanTravis G.HolmanMirya R. 2019. “Communicating Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Efforts in American Cities.” Climate7 (3): 45. doi: 10.3390/cli7030045.
12.
BowenDanielGreeneZachary. 2014. “Should We Measure Professionalism with an Index?” State Politics & Policy Quarterly14 (3): 277–96.
13.
Bromley-TrujilloRebeccaButlerJ. S.PoeJohnDavisWhitney. 2016. “The Spreading of Innovation: State Adoptions of Energy and Climate Change Policy.” Review of Policy Research33: 544–65.
14.
Bromley-TrujilloRebeccaPoeJohn. 2018. “The Importance of Salience: Public Opinion and State Policy Action on Climate Change.” Journal of Public Policy. Published electronically October30. doi:10.1017/S0143814X18000375.
15.
Bromley-TrujilloRebeccaStoutenboroughJames W.KirkpatrickKellee J.VedlitzArnold. 2014. “Climate Scientists and Environmental Interest Groups: The Intersection of Expertise and Advocacy.” Politics, Groups, and Identities2 (1): 120–134.
16.
CarleySanyaMillerChris J. 2012. “Regulatory Stringency and Policy Drivers: A Reassessment of Renewable Portfolio Standards.” Policy Studies Journal40: 730–56.
17.
ChandlerJess. 2009. “Trendy Solutions: Why Do States Adopt Sustainable Energy Portfolio Standards?” Energy Policy37: 3274–81.
18.
CoanTravisHolmanMirya R. 2008. “Voting Green.” Social Science Quarterly89 (5): 1121–35.
19.
CobbRogerElderCharles. 1983. Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of the Agenda-setting Process. 2nd ed.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
20.
CressieNoel A. C.1993. Statistics for Spatial Data. New York: Wiley.
21.
DobleAna MariaCarageaNicoleta. 2015. “Producing Small Area Estimation Using R in the Romanian Official Statistics.” Romanian Journal of Economics40 (49): 115–125
22.
DunlapRiley E.XiaoChenyangMcCrightAaron M. 2001. “Politics and Environment in America: Partisan and Ideological Cleavages in Public Support for Environmentalism.” Environmental Politics10: 23–48.
23.
EganPatrick J.MullinMegan. 2012. “Turning Personal Experience into Political Attitudes: The Effect of Local Weather on Americans’ Perceptions about Global Warming.” The Journal of Politics74: 796–809.
24.
ElazarDaniel Judah. 1994. The American Mosaic: The Impact of Space, Time, and Culture on American Politics. Boulder: Westview Press.
25.
GotwayCarol AYoungLinda J. 2002. “Combining Incompatible Spatial Data.” Journal of the American Statistical Association97 (458): 632–648.
26.
HolmanMirya R.MahoneyAnna. 2018. “Stop, Collaborate, and Listen: Women’s Collaboration in US State Legislatures.” Legislative Studies Quarterly43: 179–206.
27.
HowePeter D.MildenbergerMattoMarlonJennifer R.LeiserowitzAnthony. 2015. “Geographic variation in opinions on climate change at state and local scales in the USA.” Nature Climate Change5: 596–603.
28.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2014. “Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/
29.
JenkinsShannon. 2006. “The Impact of Party and Ideology on Roll-Call Voting in State Legislatures.” Legislative Studies Quarterly31: 235–57.
30.
KingdonJohn. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed.New York: Harper Collins.
31.
KirklandJustin H.2011. “The Relational Determinants of Legislative Outcomes: Strong and Weak Ties between Legislators.” The Journal of Politics73 (3): 887–98.
32.
KoniskyDavid M.HughesLlewelynKaylorCharles H. 2016. “Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change Concern.” Climatic Change134: 533–47.
33.
KreitzerRebecca J.2015. “Politics and Morality in State Abortion Policy.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly15(1): 41–66.
34.
KreitzerRebecca J.HamiltonAllison J.TolbertCaroline J. 2014. “Does Policy Adoption Change Opinions on Minority Rights? The Effects of Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage.” Political Research Quarterly67 (4): 795–808.
LangCorey. 2014. “Do Weather Fluctuations Cause People to Seek Information about Climate Change?” Climatic Change125 (3–4): 291–303.
37.
LeiserowitzAnthonyMaibachEdward W.Roser-RenoufConnieFeinbergGeoffHowePeter. 2013. “Climate Change in the American Mind: Amerians’ Global Warming Beleifs and Attitudes in April 2013.” YALE University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication Report. Yale Project on Climate Change Commmnication.
38.
MaestasCherie. 2000. “Professional Legislatures and Ambitious Politicians: Policy Responsiveness of State Institutions.” Legislative Studies Quarterly25: 663–90.
39.
MatisoffDaniel C.2008. “The Adoption of State Climate Change Policies and Renewable Portfolio Standards: Regional Diffusion or Internal Determinants?” Review of Policy Research25: 527–46.
40.
McCrightAaron M.DunlapRiley E. 2011. “The Politicization of Climate Change and Polarization in the American Public’s Views of Global Warming, 2001–2010.” The Sociological Quarterly52: 155–94.
41.
MenneMatthew J.WilliamsClaude N.PaleckiMichael A. 2010. “On the Reliability of the U.S. Surface Temperature Record.” Journal of Geophysical Research115 (D11): 1–9.
42.
MottaMatthew. 2018. “The enduring effect of scientific interest on trust in climate scientists in the United States.” Nature Climate Change8: 485–88.
43.
NewmarkAdam J.WitkoChristopher. 2007. “Pollution, Politics, and Preferences for Environmental Spending in the States.” Review of Policy Research24: 291–308.
44.
OsbornTracy. 2012. How Women Represent Women: Political Parties, Gender and Representation in the State Legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press.
45.
PralleSarah B.2009. “Agenda-Setting and Climate Change.” Environmental Politics18:781–99.
46.
RabeBarry G.2008. “States on Steroids: The Intergovernmental Odyssey of American Climate Policy.” Review of Policy Research25: 105–28.
47.
Rabe-HeskethSophiaSkrondalAndersPicklesAndrew. 2002. “Reliable Estimation of Generalized Linear Mixed Models Using Adaptive Quadrature.” The Stata Journal2 (1): 1–21.
48.
RaoJ. N. K. 2003. Small Area Estimation. Hoboken: Wiley.
49.
RosenthalAlan. 2004. Heavy Lifting: The Job of the American Legislature. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
50.
RudmanLaurie A.McLeanMeghan C.BunzlMartin. 2013. “When Truth Is Personally Inconvenient, Attitudes Change.” Psychological Science24 (11): 2290–96.
51.
SalkaWilliam. 2001. “Urban-Rural Conflict over Environmental Policy in the Western United States.” American Review of Public Administration31 (1): 33–48.
52.
SchillerWendy. 1995. “Senators as Political Entrepreneurs: Using Bill Sponsorship to Shape Legislative Agendas.” American Journal of Political Science39 (1): 186–203.
53.
SchuldtJonathon P.KonrathSara H.SchwarzNorbert. 2011. “‘Global Warming’ or ‘Climate Change’? Whether the Planet Is Warming Depends on Question Wording.” Public Opinion Quarterly75 (1): 115–24.
54.
ShaoWanyun. 2017. “Weather, Climate, Politics, or God? Determinants of American Public Opinions toward Global Warming.” Environmental Politics26 (1): 71–96.
55.
ShorBoris.2018. “Aggregate State Legislator Shor-McCarty Ideology Data, May 2018 update”, Harvard Dataverse, V2, doi: 10.7910/DVN/BSLEFD
56.
ShorBorisMcCartyNolan. 2011. “The Ideological Mapping of American Legislatures.” American Political Science Review105(3): 530–551
57.
StokesLeah C.2016. “Electoral Backlash against Climate Policy: A Natural Experiment on Retrospective Voting and Local Resistance to Public Policy.” American Journal of Political Science60 (4): 958–74.
58.
SwersMichele L.1998. “Are Women More Likely to Vote for Women’s Issue Bills Than Their Male Colleagues?” Legislative Studies Quarterly23: 435–48.
59.
ThomsenDanielle M.2017. Opting Out of Congress: Partisan Polarization and the Decline of Moderate Candidates. New York: Cambridge University Press.
60.
TreadwellJack. 1985. Public Policymaking in the American States. New York: Praeger.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
