Politics, Interest groups and state funding of public higher education

Research in Higher Education

Volumn 51, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 416-450

  Tandberg, David A ^a  

^a Pennsylvania Department of Education   (United States)

Author keywords

Appropriations; Educational policy; Finance; Higher education funding; Higher education policy; Policy; Policy formation; Policy makers; Politics; Politics of education; State policies; State politics

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954145163     PISSN: 03610365     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11162-010-9164-5     Document Type: Article

References (119)

1. Alt, J. E., & Lowry, R. C. (1994). Divided government, fiscal institutions, and budget deficits: Evidence from the states. The American Political Science Review, 88(4), 811-828.
2. Archibald, R. B., & Feldman, D. H. (2004). State Higher Education Spending and the Tax Revolt. College of William and Mary, Department of Economics, Working Paper # 9.
3. 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.
4. Bails, D., & Tieslau, M. A. (2000). The impact of fiscal constitutions on state and local expenditures. The Cato Journal, 20(2), 255-277.
5. Barrilleaux, C., & Berkman, M. (2003). Do Governors matter? Budgeting rules and the politics of state policy making. Political Research Quarterly, 56(4), 409-417.
6. Barrilleaux, C., Holbrook, T., & Langer, L. (2002). Electoral competition, legislative balance, and American state welfare policy. American Journal of Political Science, 46(2), 415-427.
7. 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.
8. Beyle, T. (1996). Governors: The middlemen and women in our political system. In V. Gray & H. Jacobs (Eds.), Politics in the American States: A comparative analysis (6th ed., pp. 207-252). Washington, D. C.: CQ Press.
9. 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, D. C: CQ Press.
10. Bowen, Howard. (1977). Investment in learning: The individual and social value of American higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
11. 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, D. C: CQ Press.
12. Brown, R. D. (1997). Party cleavages and welfare effort in the American states. American Political Science Review, 89(1), 23-33.
13. Browne, W. P. (1990). Organized interests and their issue niches: A search for pluralism in a policy domain. Journal of Politics, 52(2), 477-509.
14. 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.
15. Chubb, J. E. (1988). Institutions, the economy, and the dynamics of state elections. American Political Science Review, 82(1), 133-154.
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. Cohen, L. R., & Noll, R. G. (1998). Universities, constituencies, and the role of the states. In R. G. Noll (Ed.), Challenges for research universities. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
18. Coriat, B., & Dosi, G. (1998). Learning how to govern and learning how to solve problems: On the coeveolution of competences, conflict and organizational routines. In A. Chandler, P. Hagstrom, & O. Solwell (Eds.), The dynamic firm (pp. 103-133). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19. Dearden, J. A., & Husted, T. A. (1993). Do governors get what they want?: An alternative examination of the line-item veto. Public Choice, 77(4), 707-723.
20. Delaney, J. A., & Doyle, W. R. (2007). The role of higher education in state budgets. In: K. S. Shaw & D. E. Heller (Eds.), State postsecondary education research: New methods to inform policy and practice (pp. 55-76). Sterling, VA: Stylus Higher Education Policy Series.
21. Dometrius, N., & Ozymy, J. (2004). Legislative professionalism and democratic control of state legislatures. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 15, 2004. http://www. allacademic. com/meta/p83546_index. html.
22. Dorfman, R. (1979). A formula for the Gini Coefficient. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 61, 146-149.
23. Education Commission of the States. (1976). State postsecondary education profiles handbook. Denver, Colorado: Author.
24. Education Commission of the States. (1978). State postsecondary education profiles handbook. Denver, Colorado: Author.
25. Education Commission of the States. (1980). State postsecondary education profiles handbook. Denver, Colorado: Author.
26. Education Commission of the States. (1986). State postsecondary education profiles handbook. Denver, Colorado: Author.
27. Education Commission of the States (2006). Postsecondary governance structures database. http://www. ecs. org/ecsmain. asp?page=/html/issuesPS. asp, Retrieved July, 2006.
28. Elazar, D. J. (1984). American federalism: A view from the states (4th ed.). New York: Harper & Row, Publishers.
29. Elling, R. C. (1999). Administering state programs: Performance and politics. In V. Gray, R. L. Hanson, & H. Jacob (Eds.), Politics in the American states a comparative analysis (7th ed.). Washington, D. C: CQ Press.
30. Erikson, R. S., Wright, G. C., & McIver, J. P. (1993). Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and policy in the American states. New York: Cambridge University Press.
31. Fellows, M. C., & Rowe, G. (2004). Politics and the new American welfare states. American Journal of Political Science, 48(2), 362-373.
32. Fernandez, R., & Rogerson, R. (1995). On the political economy of education subsidies. Review of Economic Studies, 62(2), 249-262.
33. Ferrin, S. E. (2003). Characteristics of in-house lobbyist in American colleges and universities. Higher Education Policy, 16(1), 87-108.
34. Ferrin, E. S. (2005). Tasks and strategies of in-house lobbyists in American colleges and universities. International Journal of Educational Advancement, 5(2), 180-191.
35. Fiorina, M. (1994). Divided government in the American States: A byproduct of legislative professionalism? American Political Science Review, 88, 304-316.
36. 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.
37. Garand, J. C. (1985). Partisan change and shifting expenditure priorities in the American States, 1945-1978. American Politics Quarterly, 13(4), 255-391.
38. Geiger, R. L. (2004). Knowledge and money: Research universities and the paradox of the market place. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
39. Gormley, J. C., Jr. (1996). Accountability battles in state administration. In C. E. van Horn (Ed.), The state of the states (3rd ed.). Washington, D. C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
40. Gove, S. K., & Carpenter, J. (1977). State lobbying for higher education. Educational Record, 58(4), 357-373.
41. Gray, V., & Lowery, D. (1999). The population ecology of interest representation: Lobbying communities in the American States. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
42. Hansen, W. L., & Weisbrod, B. A. (1969). The distributional of costs and benefits of public higher education: The case of California. Journal of Human Resources, 4, 176-191.
43. Hayes, S. P. (1996). Influences on re-invention during the diffusion of innovations. Political research quarterly, 49(3), 631-650.
44. Heinz, J. P., Lauman, E. O., Nelson, R. L., & Salisbury, R. H. (1993). The hollow core: Private interests in national policy making. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
45. Heller, D. E. (2002). The policy shift in state financial aid programs. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. XVII). New York: Agathon Press.
46. Hendrick, R. M., & Garand, J. C. (1991). Expenditure tradeoffs in the US states: A pooled analysis. Journal of Public Administration and Theory, 1(3), 295-318.
47. 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(3), 851-871.
48. Holbrook, T. M., & van Dunk, E. (1993). Electoral competition in the American states. American Political Science Review, 87(4), 955-962.
49. Hossler, D., Lund, J. P., Ramin, J., Westfall, S., & Irish, S. (1997). State funding for higher education: The Sisyphean task. Journal of Higher Education, 68(2), 160-190.
50. Hovey, H. A. (1999). State spending for higher education in the next decade: The battle to sustain current support. San Jose, CA: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.
51. Humphreys, B. R. (2000). Do business cycles affect state appropriations to higher education? Southern Economic Journal, 67(2), 398-413.
52. Jacoby, W. G., & Schneider, S. K. (2001). Variability in state policy priorities: An empirical analysis. The Journal of Politics, 63(2), 544-568.
53. 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, D. C.: The Urban Institute.
54. King, J. D. (1989). Interparty competition in the American states: An examination of index components. Political Research Quarterly, 42(1), 83-92.
55. King, J. D. (2000). Changes in professionalism in US state legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 25(2), 327-343.
56. King, J. (2003). Status report on the Pell Grant program. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
57. 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(1), 66-77.
58. 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, D. C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
59. Leslie, L. L., & Ramey, R. (1986). State appropriations and enrollments: Does enrollment growth still pay? The Journal of Higher Education, 57(1), 1-19.
60. Lindeen, J. W., & Willis, G. L. (1975). Political, socioeconomic and demographic patterns of support for public higher education. The Western Political Quarterly, 28(3), 528-541.
61. Lopez, E. J. (2003). Term limits: Causes and consequences. Public Choice, 114(1-2), 1-56.
62. Lowry, R. C. (2001). The effects of state political interests and campus outputs on public university revenues. Economics of Education Review, 20, 105-119.
63. Lowry, R. C. (2007). The political economy of public universities in the United States: A review essay. State Policy and Politics Quarterly, 7(3), 303-324.
64. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism, organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review, 78(3), 734-749.
65. Marks, J. L., & Caruthers, J. K. (1999). A primer on funding of public higher education. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board.
66. McGuinness, A. (1988). State postsecondary education structures handbook. Denver, Colorado: Education Commission of the States.
67. McGuinness, A. (1994). State postsecondary education structures handbook. Denver, Colorado: Education Commission of the States.
68. McGuinness, A. (1997). State postsecondary education structures handbook. Denver, Colorado: Education Commission of the States.
69. McGuinness, A. (2003). Models of postsecondary education and governance in the States. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
70. McLendon, M. K. (2003a). Setting the agenda for state decentralization of higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 72(2), 1-37.
71. McLendon, M. K. (2003b). The politics of higher education: Toward an expanded research agenda. Educational Policy, 17(1), 165-191.
72. McLendon, M. K., Hearn, J. C., & Deaton, R. (2004). Called to account: An analysis of state performance-accountability policies for higher education. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, November 5, 2005, Kansas City, MO.
73. McLendon, M. K., Hearn, J. C., & Deaton, R. (2006). Called to account: Analyzing the origins and spread of state performance-accountability policies for higher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(1), 1-24.
74. McLendon, M. K., Hearn, J. C., & Mokher, C. G. (2009). Partisans, professionals, and power: The role of political factors in state higher education funding. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(6), 686-713.
75. 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(4), 363-400.
76. McLendon, M. K., & Ness, E. C. (2003). The politics of state higher education governance reform. Peabody journal of education, 78(4), 66-88.
77. MGT of America (2007). Funding Formulas. Paper presented at the Annual SHEEO Professional Development Conference, August, 2006, Chicago.
78. Morgan, D., & Watson, S. (1991). Political culture, political system, characteristics, and public policies among the American states. Publius. The Journal of Federalism, 21, 31-48.
79. Murphy, E. (2001). Effective lobbying strategies for higher education in state legislatures as perceived by governmental relations officers (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University, 2001). Dissertation Abstracts International, 62(06), 2049.
80. National Association of State Budget Officers. (2007). State expenditure reports, 1986-2005. Washington, DC: Author.
81. National Education Association of the United States. (2001). Where we go from here: State legislative views on higher education in the new millennium, results of the 2001 higher education issues survey. Littleton, CO: Author.
82. Ness, E. C., Tandberg, D. A., & McLendon, M. (2009, April). Interest groups and state higher education policy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association. San Diego, CA.
83. Nice, D. (1984). Interest groups and policymaking in the American states. Political Behavior, 6(2), 183-196.
84. Nicholson-Crotty, J., & Meier, K. J. (2003). Politics, structure, and public policy: The case of higher education. Educational Policy, 17(1), 80-97.
85. 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.
86. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
87. Peterson, R. G. (1976). Environmental and political determinants of state higher education appropriations policies. Journal of Higher Education, 47(5), 523-542.
88. Plotnick, R. D., & Winters, R. F. (1985). A polticoeconomic theory of income redistribution. American Political Science Review, 79, 458-473.
89. Ringquist, E. J., Hill, K. Q., Leighley, J. E., & Hinton-Anderson, A. (1997). Lower-class mobilization and policy linkage in the U. S. States: A correction. American Journal of Political Science, 41(1), 339-344.
90. Rizzo, M. J. (2005). State preferences for higher education spending: A panel data analysis, 1977-2001. Paper presented at the Cornell Higher Education Research Institutes annual conference, Ithaca, NY.
91. Rosenthal, A. (1991). Legislative life. New York: Harper and Row.
92. Rosenthal, A. (1998). The decline of representative democracy. Washington DC: CQ Press.
93. Sabloff, P. L. W. (1997). Another reason why state legislatures will continue to restrict public university autonomy. The Review of Higher Education, 20(2), 141-162.
94. Selingo, J. (2003). What Americans think about higher education: Poll finds strong support for colleges, but many questions about their priorities. The Chronicle of Higher Education. On-line: http://chronicle. com/weekly/v49/i34/34a01001. htm. Accessed April 7, 2009.
95. Sharkansky, I. (1968). Agency requests, gubernatorial support, and budget success in state legislatures. American Political Science review, 62, 1220-1231.
96. Sharkansky, I. (1969). The utility of Elazar's political culture. Polity, 2, 66-83.
97. Sharkansky, I., & Hofferbert, R. I. (1969). Dimensions of state politics, economics, and public policy. American Political Science Review, 63(3), 867-879.
98. Shepsle, K. A. (1979). Institutional arrangements and equilibrium in multidimensional voting models. American Journal of Political Science, 23(1), 27-59.
99. Shepsle, K. A. (1989). Studying institutions: Some lessons from the rational choice approach. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1(2), 131-147.
100. Soss, J., Schram, S. F., Vartanian, T. P., & O'Brien, E. (2001). Setting the terms of relief: Explaining state policy choices in the devolution revolution. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 378-395.
101. Squire, P. (1992). Legislative professionalization and membership diversity in state legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 17(1), 69-79.
102. Squire, P. (2000). Uncontested seats in state legislative elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 25(1), 131-146.
103. Squire, P., & Hamm, K. E. (2005). 101 Chambers: Congress, State Legislatures and the Future of Legislative Studies. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
104. State Higher Education Executive Officers. (2006). State higher education finance. Boulder, CO: Author.
105. Tandberg, D. A. (2006). State-level higher education interest group alliances. Higher Education in Review, 3, 25-49.
106. Tandberg, D. A. (2007, November). Interest groups and governmental institutions: The politics of state funding of public higher education. Paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. Louisville, KY.
107. Tandberg, D. A. (2009). Interest groups and governmental institutions: The politics of state funding of public higher education. Educational Policy. doi: 10. 1177/0895904809339163.
108. 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, D. C: CQ Press.
109. Thompson, J. A. (1987). Agency request, gubernatorial support, and budget success in state legislatures revisited. Journal of Politics, 49, 756-779.
110. Thompson, J. A., & Felts, A. A. (1992). Politicians and professionals: The influence of state agency heads in budgetary success. The Western Political Quarterly, 45(1), 153-168.
111. Toutkoushian, R. K., & Hollis, P. (1998). Using panel data to examine legislative demand for higher education. Education Economics, 6, 141-157.
112. Truman, D. (1951). The governmental process. New York: Knopf.
113. UCLA Academic Technology Services (2006). Stata FAQ: How can I check for collinearity in survey regression?http://www. ats. ucla. edu/stat/stata/faq/svycollin. htm (Accessed November 01, 2006).
114. UNESCO. (2003). Gender and education for all: The leap to equity. Paris: France: Author.
115. Williams, R. (2005). Multicollinearity. http://www. nd. edu/~rwilliam/stats2/l11. pdf (Accessed April 3, 2007).
116. Wilson, L. A., & Sylvia, R. (1993). Changing revenue conditions and state budgetary decisions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3(3), 319-333.
117. Windham, D. M. (1970). Education, equality and income redistribution. Lexington, MA: Heath Lexington Books.
118. Yates, J., & Fording, R. (2005). Politics and state punitiveness in black and white. Journal of Politics, 67(4), 1099-1121.
119. Zumeta, W. (1996). Meeting the demand for higher education without breaking the bank: A framework for the design of state higher education policies for an era of increasing demand. Journal of Higher Education, 67(4), 367-425.