Policy feedback and economic risk: the influence of privatization on social policy preferences

REFERENCES

• Anderson, C.J., and Pontusson, J. (2007) ‘Workers, worries and welfare states: social protection and job insecurity in 15 OECD countries’, European Journal of Political Research 46(2): 211–35. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2007.00692.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, N. (2005) ‘Multilevel analysis of comparative data: a comment’, Political Analysis 13(4): 457–8. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpi023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry, W.D., Golder, M. and Milton, D. (2012) ‘Improving tests of theories positing interaction’, The Journal of Politics 74(3): 653–71. doi: 10.1017/S0022381612000199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brambor, T., Clark, W.R. and Golder, M. (2006) ‘Understanding interaction models: improving empirical analyses’, Political Analysis 14(1): 63–82. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpi014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooks, C. and Manza, J. (2007) Why Welfare States Persist: The Importance of Public Opinion in Democracies, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burgoon, B. and Dekker, F. (2010) ‘Flexible employment, economic insecurity and social policy preferences in Europe’, Journal of European Social Policy 20(2): 126–41. doi: 10.1177/0958928709358789
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busemeyer, A.G., Goerres, A. and Weschle, S. (2009) ‘Attitudes towards redistributive spending in an era of demographic aging: the rival pressures from age and income in 14 OECD countries’, Journal of European Social Policy 19(3): 195–212. doi: 10.1177/0958928709104736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, A.L. (2003). How Policies Make Citizens: Senior Political Activism and the American Welfare State, Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, A.L. (2012). ‘Policy makes mass politics’, Annual Review of Political Science 15: 333–51. doi: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-012610-135202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter, D. (2012) ‘Is health politics different?’, Annual Review of Political Science 15: 287–311. doi: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-050409-113009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casamatta, G., Cremer, H. and Pestieau, P. (2000) ‘Political sustainability and the design of social insurance’, Journal of Public Economics 75(3): 341–64. doi: 10.1016/S0047-2727(99)00070-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cusack, T.R., Iversen, T. and Rehm, P. (2006) ‘Risks at work: the demand and supply sides of government redistribution’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 22(3): 365–89. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/grj022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esping-Anderson, G. (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Franzese, R.J. (2005) ‘Empirical strategies for various manifestations of multilevel data’, Political Analysis 13(4): 430–46. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpi024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelman, A. and Hill, J. (2007) Data Analysis using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models, New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giaimo, S. (2001) ‘Who pays for health care reform?’, In P. Pierson (ed.), The New Politics of the Welfare State, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 334–67.
   Google Scholar
• Gingrich, J.R. and Ansell, B.W. (2012) ‘Preferences in context: Micro preferences, macro contexts and the demand for social policy’, Comparative Political Studies 45(12):1624–54. doi: 10.1177/0010414012463904
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goerres, A. and Tepe, M. (2010) ‘Age-based self-interest, intergenerational solidarity and the welfare state: a comparative analysis of older people's attitudes towards public childcare in 12 OECD countries’, European Journal of Political Research 49(6):818–51. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2010.01920.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gottschalk, M. (2000) The Shadow Welfare State: Labor, Business, and the Politics of Health Care in the United States, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hacker, J.S. (2002) The Divided Welfare State: The Battle over Public and Private Social Benefits in the United States, New York: Cambridge University press.
   Google Scholar
• Hacker, J.S. (2004a) ‘Dismantling the health care state? Political institutions, public policies, and the comparative politics of health reform’, British Journal of Political Science 34(4): 693–724. doi: 10.1017/S0007123404000250
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hacker, J.S. (2004b) ‘Privatizing risk without privatizing the welfare state: the hidden politics of social policy retrenchment in the United States’, American Political Science Review 98(2):243–60. doi: 10.1017/S0003055404001121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hacker, J.S., Rehm, P. and Schlesinger, M. (2013) ‘The insecure American: economic experiences, financial worries, and policy attitudes’, The Perspectives of Politics 11(1): 23–49. doi: 10.1017/S1537592712003647
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobolt, S.B. and Klemmensen, R. (2008) ‘Government responsiveness and political competition in comparative perspective’, Comparative Political Studies 41(3): 309–37. doi: 10.1177/0010414006297169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Immergut, E.M. (1992) Health Politics: Interests and Institutions in Western Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• ISSP (2006) International Social Survey Programme (ISSP): Role of Government, data version: 2008-09-11, Cologne: GESIS Cologne Germany ZA4700.
   Google Scholar
• Iversen, T. (2005) Capitalism, Democracy, and Welfare, New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Iversen, T. and Soskice, D. (2001) ‘An asset theory of social policy preferences’, American Political Science Review 95(4): 875–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. (1998) ‘Seeing difference: market health reform in Europe’, Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 23(1): 1–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, L.R. (1992) ‘The recoil effect: public opinion and policymaking in the US and Britain’, Comparative Politics 24(2): 199–217. doi: 10.2307/422278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jæger, M.M. (2006) ‘Welfare regimes and attitudes toward redistribution: the regime hypothesis revisited’, European Sociological Review 22(2): 157–70. doi: 10.1093/esr/jci049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jæger, M.M. (2009) ‘United but divided: welfare regimes and the level and variance in public support for redistribution’, European Sociological Review 25(6): 723–37. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcn079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jennings, W. (2009) ‘The public thermostat, political responsiveness and error-correction: border control and asylum in Britain, 1994–2007’, British Journal of Political Science 39(4): 847–70. doi: 10.1017/S000712340900074X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, J. (2010) ‘Institutional feedback and support for the welfare states: the case of national health care’, Comparative Political Studies 43(7): 862–85. doi: 10.1177/0010414010361342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, J. (2013) ‘Policy feedback and support for the welfare state’, European Journal of Social Policy 23(2): 134–48. doi: 10.1177/0958928712471224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kam, C.D. and Franzese, R.J.J. (2007) Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analysis, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kang, S.G. and Power, G.B., Jr. (2010) ‘Representation and policy responsiveness: the median voter, election rules, and redistributive welfare spending’, The Journal of Politics 72(4): 1014–28. doi: 10.1017/S0022381610000502
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, J. (2003) For all these Rights: Business, Labor, and the Shaping of America's Public Private Welfare State, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Korpi, W. (1983) The Democratic Class Struggle, London: Routledge and Kegan.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, C.A. (2008) ‘The institutional logic of welfare attitudes: how welfare regimes influence public support’, Comparative Political Studies 41(2):145–68. doi: 10.1177/0010414006295234
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linos, K. and West, M. (2003) ‘Self-interests, social beliefs, and attitudes to redistribution: re-addressing the issue of cross-national variation’, European Sociological Review 19(4): 393–409. doi: 10.1093/esr/19.4.393
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipsmeyer, C.S. and Nordstrom, T. (2003) ‘East versus West: comparing political attitudes and welfare preferences across European societies’, Journal of European Public Policy 10(3): 339–64. doi: 10.1080/1350176032000085342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, J.S. and Freese, J. (2005) Regression Models for Categorical Outcomes using Stata (2nd ed.), College Station, TX: STATA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, J. and Myrskyla, M. (2009) ‘Always the third rail? Pension income and policy preferences in European democracies’, Comparative Political Studies 42(8): 1068–97. doi: 10.1177/0010414009331722
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margalit, Y. (2013) ‘Explaining social policy preferences: evidence from the great recession’, American Political Science Review 107(1): 80–103. doi: 10.1017/S0003055412000603
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, C.J. (1995) ‘Nature or nurture? Sources of firm preferences for national health reform’, American Political Science Review 89(4): 898–913. doi: 10.2307/2082516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meltzer, A.H. and Richard, S. (1981) ‘A rational theory of the size of government’, Journal of Political Economy 89(5): 914–27. doi: 10.1086/261013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mettler, S. and Soss, J. (2004) ‘The consequences of public policy for democratic citizenship: bridging policy studies and mass politics’, Perspectives on Politics 2(1): 55–73. doi: 10.1017/S1537592704000623
   Google Scholar
• Moene, K.O. and Wallerstein, M. (2001) ‘Inequality, social insurance and redistribution’, American Journal of Political Science 95(4): 859–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paris, V. Devaux, M. and Wei, L. (2010) ‘Health systems institutional characteristics: A survey of 19 OECD countries’, OECD Health Working Papers No.50, available at http://www/oecd.org/els/health/workingpapers (accessed 8 May 2013). doi: 10.1787/5kmfxfq9qbnr-en
   Google Scholar
• Peacock, A.T. and Wiseman, J. (1961) ‘The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pierson, P. (1993) ‘When effect becomes cause: policy feedback and political change’, World Politics 45(4): 595–628. doi: 10.2307/2950710
   Google Scholar
• Pierson, P. (2001) The New Politics of the Welfare State, New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pierson, P.(2006) ‘Public policies as institutions’, in I. Shapiro, S. Skowronek and D. Galvin (eds), Rethinking Political Institutions: The Art of the State, New York: New York University Press, pp. 114–31.
   Google Scholar
• Rehm, P. (2009) ‘Risks and redistribution: an individual analysis’, Comparative Political Studies 42(7): 855–81. doi: 10.1177/0010414008330595
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehm, P. (2011) ‘Social policy by popular demand’, World Politics 63(2): 271–99. doi: 10.1017/S0043887111000037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehm, P., Hacker, J. and Schlesinger, M. (2012) ‘Insecure alliances: risk, inequality, and support for the welfare state’, American Political Science Review 106(2): 386–406. doi: 10.1017/S0003055412000147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rein, M. and Rainwater, L. (eds) (1986) The Public/Private Interplay in Social Protection: A Comparative Study, Armonk: M.E. Sharp.
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, B. (1998) Just institutions Matter: The Moral and Political Logic of the Universal Welfare State, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rudolph, T.J. and Evans, J. (2005) ‘Political trust, ideology, and public support for government spending’, American Journal of Political Science 49(3): 660–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00148.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlesinger, M. (2011) ‘Making the best of hard times: how the nation's economic circumstances shaped the public's embrace of health care reform’, Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 36(6): 899–1019. doi: 10.1215/03616878-1460560
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Schuur, W.H. (2011) Ordinal Item Response Theory: Mokken Scale Analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Soroka, S.N. and Wlezien, C. (2010) Degrees of Democracy: Politics, Public Opinion, and Policy, New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Soss, J. and Schram, S.F. (2007) ‘A public transformed? Welfare reform as policy feedback’, American Political Science Review 101(1): 111–27. doi: 10.1017/S0003055407070049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svallfors, S. (1997) ‘Worlds of welfare and attitudes to redistribution: a comparison of eightwestern nations’, European Sociological Review 13(3): 283–304. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.esr.a018219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomz, M., Wittenberg, J. and King, G. (2003) ‘Clarify: software for interpreting and presenting statistical results’, Journal of Statistics Software 8(1): 1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Wendt, C. (2009) ‘Mapping European healthcare systems: a comparative analysis of financing, service provision, and access to healthcare’, Journal of European Social Policy 19(5): 432–45. doi: 10.1177/0958928709344247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wendt, C., Kohl, J., Mischke, M. and Pfeifer, M. (2010) ‘How do Europeans perceive their healthcare system? Patterns of satisfaction and preference for state involvement in the field of healthcare’, European Sociological Review 26 (2): 177–92. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcp014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wlezien, C. (1995) ‘The public as thermostat: dynamics of preferences for spending’, American Journal of Political Science 39(4): 981–1000. doi: 10.2307/2111666
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar