Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T17:29:59.238Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Their Boot in Our Face No Longer? Administrative Sectionalism and Resistance to Federal Authority in the U.S. South

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Nicholas G. Napolio Open the ORCID record for Nicholas G. Napolio [Opens in a new window]  and
Jordan Carr Peterson
Nicholas G. Napolio*
Affiliation:
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Jordan Carr Peterson
Affiliation:
Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX, USA
*
Nicholas G. Napolio, Department of Political Science, University of Southern California, 3518 Trousdale Pkwy, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

What explains state agency resistance to actions taken by their federal counterparts? And do sectional tensions make state bureaucratic nonacquiescence particularly likely in the U.S. South? We theorize that state resistance to federal administrative policy is more likely among Southern state bureaus due to administrative sectionalism. We argue that state agencies can and do resist federal administrative orders independent of other political constraints. This study is among the first to consider the policy consequences of sectionalism in state bureaucracies. We test our claims by employing a mixed methods approach that analyzes each instance of litigation and intervention by state bureaucrats in opposition to actions and orders by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) from 2010 to 2017. We find that, all else equal, state agency resistance to federal utility policy is about 3.75 times as likely among Southern utility regulators. This research has important normative implications for administrative politics as it suggests agencies with putatively apolitical policy jurisdiction have political preferences driven by sectional tension.

Keywords

administrative politicsenergy policyfederalismintergovernmental relationspartisanshipsectionalismSouthern politics
Type
Research Article
Information
State Politics & Policy Quarterly , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , March 2019 , pp. 101 - 122
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baekgaard, Martin, Blom-Hansen, Jens, and Serritzlew, S⊘ren. 2015. “When Politics Matter: The Impact of Politicians' and Bureaucrats' Preferences on Salient and Nonsalient Policy Areas.” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 28 (4): 459–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balla, Steven J., and Deering, Christopher J.. 2015. “Salience, Complexity and State Resistance to Federal Mandates.” Journal of Public Policy 35 (3): 459–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, Timothy, and Coate, Stephen. 2003. “Elected versus Appointed Regulators: Theory and Evidence.” Journal of the European Economic Association 1 (5): 1176–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Merle. 1978. “Racial Composition of Congressional Districts and Support for Federal Voting Rights in the American South.” Social Science Quarterly 59 (3): 435–450.Google Scholar
Bowling, Cynthia J., and Pickerill, J. Mitchell. 2013. “Fragmented Federalism: The State of American Federalism 2012–13.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 43 (3): 315–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, Charles S., and Rodgers, Harrell R.. 1976. “Coercion to Compliance: Southern School Districts and School Desegregation Guidelines.” Journal of Politics 38 (4): 987–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callen, Zachary. 2016. Railroads and American Political Development: Infrastructure, Federalism, and State Building. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Clump, Edward. 2017. “In Texas, Specter of FERC Jurisdiction Stirs Concern.” E&E News, November 30. (accessed November 30, 2017).Google Scholar
Conlan, Timothy. 2017. “Intergovernmental Relations in a Compound Republic: The Journey from Cooperative to Polarized Federalism.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 47 (2): 171–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dadok, Alexander T. 2013. “On the Pulse of America: The Federal Government's Assertion of Jurisdiction over Electric Transmission Planning and Its Effect on the Public Interest.” North Carolina Law Review 91:997–1053.Google Scholar
Dal Bó, Ernesto. 2006. “Regulatory Capture: A Review.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 206:214–216.Google Scholar
Davis, Sandra. 2015. “Renewable Electricity Generation and Transmission Expansion: A Federal, State, or Regional Approach?” The Electricity Journal 28 (4): 28–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, Marian Wright. 1973. “Southern School Desegregation, 1954-1973: A Judicial-Political Overview.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 407:32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisen, Joel. 2017. “Dual Electricity Federalism is Dead, but How Dead, and What Replaces It?” The George Washington Journal of Energy & Environmental Law 8 (1): 3–22.Google Scholar
Farhang, Sean, and Yaver, Miranda. 2016. “Divided Government and the Fragmentation of American Law.” American Journal of Political Science 60 (2): 401–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gailmard, Sean, and Patty, John W.. 2007. “Slackers and Zealots: Civil Service, Policy Discretion, and Bureaucratic Expertise.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (4): 873–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garvey, Gerald. 1993. Facing the Bureaucracy: Living and Dying in a Public Agency. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Gerber, Brian J., Maestas, Cherie, and Dometrius, Nelson C.. 2005. “State Legislative Influence over Agency Rulemaking: The Utility of Ex Ante Review.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 5 (1): 24–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goelzhauser, Greg, and Rose, Shanna. 2017. “The State of American Federalism 2016–2017: Policy Reversals and Partisan Perspectives on Intergovernmental Relations.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 47 (3): 285–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gormley, William T. 1983. The Politics of Public Utility Regulation. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Harada, Masataka. 2012. “The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Strategic Policy Making in the South.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 12 (4): 456–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoecker, James J., and Smith, Douglas W.. 2014. “Regulatory Federalism and Development of Electric Transmission: A Brewing Storm?” Energy Law Journal 35:71–99.Google Scholar
Hopper, JoyAnna S. 2017. “The Regulation of Combination: The Implications of Combining Natural Resource Conservation and Environmental Protection.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 17 (1): 105–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Jennifer M. 2017. “Governors and Partisan Polarization in the Federal Arena.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 47 (3): 314–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Jacqueline. 2001. “Federal Power, Southern Power: A Long View, 1860–1940.” The Journal of American History 87 (4): 1392–1396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, V. O. Jr. 1949. Southern Politics in State and Nation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2001. “Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data.” Political Analysis 9 (2): 137–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klass, Alexandra B., and Wilson, Elizabeth J.. 2012. “Interstate Transmission Challenges for Renewable Energy: A Federalism Mismatch.” Vanderbilt Law Review 65 (6): 1801–1873.Google Scholar
Krause, George. 2010. “Legislative Delegation of Authority to Bureaucratic Agencies.” In The Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy, ed. Robert Durant. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 521–544.Google Scholar
Lassiter, Matthew D. 2010. “De Jure/De Facto Segregation: The Long Shadow of a National Myth.” In The Myth of Southern Exceptionalism, eds. Lassiter, Matthew D., and Crespino, Joseph. New York: Oxford University Press, 25–44.Google Scholar
Lerman, Lisa G., and Sanderson, Annette K.. 1978. “Discrimination in Access to Public Places: A Survey of State and Federal Public Accommodations Laws.” New York University Review of Law and Social Change 7:215–311.Google Scholar
McCann, Pamela, and Clouser, J.. 2016. The Federal Design Dilemma: Congress and Intergovernmental Delegation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCubbins, Matthew, Noll, Roger, and Weingast, Barry. 1987. “Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control.” Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 3 (2): 243–277.Google Scholar
McKee, Seth, and Shaw, Daron. 2003. “Suburban Voting in Presidential Elections.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 33 (1): 125–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moe, Terry. 1985. “Control and Feedback in Economic Regulation: The Case of the NLRB.” American Political Science Review 79 (4): 1094–1116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, Adam, Callaghan, Timothy, and Karch, Andrew. 2017. “Return of the ‘Rightful Remedy’: Partisan Federalism, Resource Availability, and Nullification Legislation in the American States.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 48 (3): 495–522. doi:10.1093/publius/pjx061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parinandi, Srinivas, and Hitt, Matthew P.. 2018. “How Politics Influences the Energy Pricing Decisions of Elected Public Utilities Commissioners.” Energy Policy 118:77–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peskoe, Ari. 2011. “A Challenge for Federalism: Achieving National Goals in the Electricity Industry.” Missouri Environmental Law and Policy Review 18 (2): 210–281.Google Scholar
Peterson, Jordan Carr. 2018. “All Their Eggs in One Basket? Ideological Congruence in Congress and the Bicameral Origins of Concentrated Delegation to the Bureaucracy.” Laws 7 (2): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickerill, J. Mitchell, and Bowling, Cynthia J.. 2014. “Polarized Parties, Politics, and Policies: Fragmented Federalism in 2013–2014.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 44 (3): 369–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Shanna, and Bowling, Cynthia J.. 2015. “The State of American Federalism 2014–15: Pathways to Policy in an Era of Party Polarization.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 45 (3): 351–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selin, Jennifer. 2015. “What Makes an Agency Independent?” American Journal of Political Science 59 (4): 971–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Frank J., and Scicchitano, Michael J.. 1985. “State Implementation Effort and Federal Regulatory Policy: The Case of Occupational Safety and Health.” Journal of Politics 47 (2): 676–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vukadin, Katherine T. 2015. “Obamacare Interrupted: Obstructive Federalism and the Consumer Information Blockade.” Buffalo Law Review 63 (3): 421–476.Google Scholar
Webb, Clive, ed. 2005. Massive Resistance: Southern Opposition to the Second Reconstruction. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, Max. 1958. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. Edited by Gerth, Hans and Mills, C. Wright. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weingast, Barry, and Moran, Mark. 1983. “Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission.” Journal of Political Economy 91 (5): 765–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitford, Andrew B. 2007. “Competing Explanations for Bureaucratic Preferences.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 19 (3): 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Dan B. 2010. “Agency Theory and the Bureaucracy.” In The Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy, ed. Durant, Robert. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 181–206.Google Scholar
Yaver, Miranda. 2014. “When Do Agencies Have Agency? Bureaucratic Noncompliance and Dynamic Lawmaking in United States Statutory Law, 1973–2010.” Working Paper, Columbia University. (accessed October 14, 2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar