Responsive Partisanship: Public Support for the Clinton and Obama Health Care Plans
Research Question
How do voters respond to policy changes in Medicaid, particularly in terms of political accountability for governors?
Main Finding
Governors receive credit or blame for Medicaid expansion decisions. Voters in states that expanded Medicaid were more likely to support incumbent governors, especially when they perceived personal or community benefits.
Research Design
Difference-in-differences analysis comparing political attitudes and electoral outcomes in Medicaid expansion and non-expansion states before and after policy changes.
Data Employed
Public opinion surveys and gubernatorial election results, matched with state-level Medicaid expansion decisions and health coverage statistics.
Substantive Importance
The paper illustrates how major public policy changes translate into electoral accountability, even for policies that are complex and administered at multiple levels of government.
Research Areas
Public Policy, Electoral Accountability, State Politics, Quantitative Methods, Retrospective Voting
Citation
@article{healthcare,
author = {Kriner, Douglas L. and Reeves, Andrew},
title = {Responsive Partisanship: Public Support for the Clinton and Obama Health Care Plans},
journal = {Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law},
volume = {39},
number = {4},
pages = {717--749},
year = {2014},
}