Doctoral Dissertation Research: Explaining the Mechanisms of Collective Bargaining Legislative Outcomes at the State-Level

今天阶级斗争的一个表现是在过去十年中重新倡导工作权（RTW）立法。仅在2014年，就有27个州提出了60项RTW法案，密歇根州（2012年）和威斯康星州（2014年）通过的RTW法律导致许多人质疑，在工会组织严重的州，如何通过倒退的劳动法。最终，这个问题被嵌入到一个更大的问题中，即谁或什么影响了国家制定的政策？在社会学领域，有四种不同的理论试图回答这个普遍问题：（1）多元主义，（2）精英理论，（3）工具主义-马克思主义，（4）国家中心制度主义。州立法机构中劳工和商业利益之间日益激烈的斗争为检验四种占主导地位的社会学权力理论的相对价值提供了一个完美的案例。 本文的目的是回答以下问题：（1）是什么因素导致了州议员的变化？行动？ (2)哪些因素决定了州立法机构提出的集体谈判法案的命运？本研究审查了2011-2012年立法会议期间所有州级集体谈判法案的提案和通过情况。该分析结合了五个独特的数据集。第一个数据集包括2011-2012年立法会议期间所有州立法机构提出的与集体谈判有关的每项法案的数据（N= 2，068）。 第二份报告载有2008年和2010年对州一级选举的财政捐助数据。 第三个是2010年人口普查中关于州和组成特征的信息。 第四部分包含州一级制度差异的数据，如否决规则、多数规则和委员会任命程序的差异。第五个数据集将收集2012年所有州立法者的公司业务关系的公开数据。 这些数据将被用来研究两个结果：第一，通过使用每个立法者作为一个分析单位，调查员计划解释立法者的变化？法案提案。其次，通过使用每个提案作为分析单位，广义有序逻辑回归模型将预测每个法案的结果：（1）提出，（2）在第一议院失败，（2）在第二议院失败，（3）否决，或（4）通过立法。这两个分析将分析所有四个理论模型。

SES-1602606Larry IsaacAnna JacobsVanderbilt UniversityOne manifestation of class contention today is the revival in advocacy for Right-to-Work (RTW) legislation in the last decade. In 2014 alone, there were 60 proposed RTW bills in 27 states, and the passage of RTW laws in Michigan (2012) and Wisconsin (2014) has led many to question how regressive labor laws could be passed in heavily unionized states. Ultimately the question being asked is embedded in the larger question of who or what influences the policies enacted by the state? Within the field of sociology, there are four distinct theories that attempt to answer this general question: (1) pluralism, (2) elite theory, (3) instrumentalist-Marxism, and (4) state-centered institutionalism. The increasingly heated battle between labor and business interests in state legislatures provides a perfect case for testing the relative merit of four dominant sociological theories of power. The purpose of this dissertation is to answer the following questions: (1) What factors account for the variation in state legislators? actions? (2) What factors account for the fate of proposed collective bargaining bills in state legislatures? This study examines the proposal and passage of all state-level collective bargaining bills during the 2011-2012 legislative session. The analysis combines five unique datasets. The first dataset consists of data on every bill related to collective bargaining proposed among all state legislatures in the 2011-2012 legislative session (N=2,068). The second has data on the financial contributions to state-level elections in 2008 and 2010. The third has information on state and constituent characteristics from the 2010 census. The fourth contains data on state level institutional differences, such as differences in rules about vetoing, majority rule, and committee appointment procedures. The fifth dataset will collect publicly available data on the corporate business ties of all state legislators in 2012. These data will be used to study two outcomes: First, by using each legislator as a unit of analysis, the investigator plans to explain variation in legislators? bill proposals. Second, by using each proposed bill as the unit of analysis, generalized ordered logistic regression models will predict the outcome of each bill: (1) proposed, (2) failed in first chamber, (2) failed in second chamber, (3) vetoed, or (4) passed into legislation. Both analyses will analyze all four theoretical models.