Polarization and Policy: The Politics of Public-Sector Pensions

被引:26
作者
Anzia, Sarah F. [1 ]
Moe, Terry M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Berkeley, Publ Policy, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Polit Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
STATE;
D O I
10.1111/lsq.12145
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
For decades, America's state and local governments have promised their workers increasingly generous pensions but failed to fully fund them, producing a fiscal problem of staggering proportions. In this article, we examine the politics of public pensions. While mainstream theoretical ideas in the American politics literature would suggest the pension issue should be polarized, with Democrats pushing for generous pensions over Republican resistance, we develop an argument-rooted in more traditional theoretical work by Schattschneider, Lowi, Wilson, and others-implying that both parties should be expected to support generous pensions during normal times and that only after the onset of the Great Recession, which expanded the scope of conflict, should the parties begin to diverge. Using a new data set of state legislators' votes on hundreds of pension bills passed between 1999 and 2011, we carry out an empirical analysis that supports these expectations.
引用
收藏
页码:33 / 62
页数:30
相关论文
共 35 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2010, AGENDAS INSTABILITY
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2008, REFORMRISK WHAT HA
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2015, GOVT ITSELF PUBLIC U
  • [4] [Anonymous], 1980, POLITICS REGULATION
  • [5] [Anonymous], CALIFORNIA J PUBLIC
  • [6] [Anonymous], PLOT AGAINST PENSION
  • [7] [Anonymous], FUNDING STATE LOCAL
  • [8] [Anonymous], MOTHER JONES
  • [9] [Anonymous], MAY 2013 UPDATED AGG
  • [10] [Anonymous], 2012, POLIT RES QUART