Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Download

When and Why Do States Preempt Local Policymaking?

Thu, August 30, 10:00 to 11:30am, Sheraton, Beacon A

Abstract

Advocates for greater devolution of policymaking powers to state and local governments argue that citizens’ political opinions are better represented and programs/services are provided more efficiently when government is “closer” to the people. However, an important trend in American politics is the recent increase in the introduction and implementation of preemption laws by state legislatures that explicitly prohibit local governments from making policy on specific issues. For example, according to the National League of Cities, 25 states currently prevent local governments from increasing their minimum wage above the state minimum. Similarly, states have recently acted to block local governments from setting their own policy for ride sharing (37 states) and home sharing (3 states) services. Perhaps most controversially, state governments have also set limits on what classes of citizens can be protected by local anti-discrimination ordinances. Despite increasing popular and media attention to state preemption of local policymaking, the empirical political science literature on preemption remains scarce. Notably, a 2018 symposium in PS: Political Science and Politics (“Home Rule Be Damned: Exploring Policy Conflicts between the Statehouse and City Hall”) points to the need for a more systematic and comprehensive study of state preemption of local policymaking. In this paper, we assess under what conditions and for which issues states are most likely to enact preemption laws. Specifically, using an original dataset on state preemption laws, we investigate how political, institutional, and demographic factors predict the implementation of preemption laws. The empirical findings have important implications for our understanding of the interplay between state and local governments that is a hallmark of American democracy.

Authors