Policy venue preference and relative trust in government in federal systems

Abstract

This article defines a concept of relative trust—the gap between trust in different levels of government in a federalist system—and examines whether it influences public attitudes about which level of government holds authority in specific policy domains. While scholars have explored how trust in government affects political systems from a national perspective, little is known about how trust influences multitiered government systems in which public trust levels differ for national versus subnational governments. This article finds that greater relative trust in the state versus national level of government is associated with support for devolution in several policy areas where governing authority is shared: unemployment, health care, environmental policy, and food safety regulation. The implication is that relative trust shapes public preferences about policy centralization or decentralization and provides an individual‐level mechanism through which windows of opportunity open for changes in the allocation of policy authority.

Accountability in Government Contracting Arrangements: Experimental Analysis of Blame Attribution Across Levels of Government

“…Over the last 40 years, local government has enjoyed the highest level of trust when compared with state and federal governments with the federal government receiving the lowest level of citizen confidence (Cole & Kincaid, 2000). Trust shapes public preferences for government responsibility (Leland et al, 2020), that can in turn influence assessments of blame. In this experiment, the lowest level of blame goes to the county as predicted (which enjoys a higher level of citizen trust-that is, Cole & Kincaid, 2000), but this is also similar to the level of blame attributed to the federal government (which bears the lowest level of trust).…”

“…The legislative theory behind devolving public services to lower levels of government is to respond to the needs of constituents while passing the costs of providing the service to a lower level of government (e.g., Peterson, 1995). Policy studies show that the public has preferences for whether the federal, state, or local government level should be responsible for a given policy (Arceneaux, 2005; Schneider et al, 2010; Schneider & Jacoby, 2003; Shaw & Reinhart, 2001) based on political ideology (Schneider et al, 2010), evaluations of government performance (Arceneaux, 2005), support for devolution to the local government (Wolak, 2016), and trust (Leland et al, 2020; Maestas et al, 2020). Even in policy areas with shared responsibility, greater trust in the state government compared with the federal government leads to public preferences for state responsibility (Leland et al, 2020).…”

“…Policy studies show that the public has preferences for whether the federal, state, or local government level should be responsible for a given policy (Arceneaux, 2005; Schneider et al, 2010; Schneider & Jacoby, 2003; Shaw & Reinhart, 2001) based on political ideology (Schneider et al, 2010), evaluations of government performance (Arceneaux, 2005), support for devolution to the local government (Wolak, 2016), and trust (Leland et al, 2020; Maestas et al, 2020). Even in policy areas with shared responsibility, greater trust in the state government compared with the federal government leads to public preferences for state responsibility (Leland et al, 2020). Citizen trust in government has been on the decline since the 1970s, where citizens now consistently trust the local government level more than the federal and state government levels (Cole & Kincaid, 2000; Moore, 2013; Wolak & Palus, 2010).…”

“…In an experiment, Marvel (2014) found the influence of politics on blame shifting across levels of government in the case of the Boston Marathon bombing where blame statements about the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were particularly salient among Republications, whereas exculpatory statements were particularly salient among Democrats. Following the default blame to the federal government in the case of crises (Gomez & Wilson, 2008; Marvel, 2014) and borrowing the logic behind citizen trust shaping policy preferences (Leland et al, 2020), we hypothesize the following:…”

“…J. Conlan, 2010; Cutler, 2004; Peterson, 1995). Like in contracting, the lines of accountability may be blurred if citizens hold a certain level of government—federal, state, or local—responsible for a given policy area (Arceneaux, 2005; Konisky, 2011; Leland et al, 2020; Schneider & Jacoby, 2003), even if they have little control.…”