Journalists, politicians, and the U.S. public frequently identify places as "1iberal" or "conservative" or as "Republican" or "Democratic." Thus Utah and New Hampshire are frequently identified as "Republican" states while Maryland and Arkansas are "Democratic" states. Likewise, Oklahoma and Mississippi are "conservative" while Massachusetts and Oregon are "liberal." Can the actual partisan and ideological orientations of the American states be determined, mapped, and explained? How is the distribution of partisan and ideological identification related to that of state policy initiatives? These are the types of questions raised by the authors of Statehouse Democracy. This book represents a welcome revival of the literature on comparing state policies that had developed in the discipline of political science during the 1960s and 1970s.

    In the first two chapters the authors use survey data taken from CBS News/New York Times polls of the U.S. electorate in order to determine the ideological and partisan orientation of voters in each state. The database includes 122 surveys taken between 1976 and 1988, which collectively include nearly 160,000 respondents. Survey participants were asked whether they considered themselves Democrats, Republicans, or Independents, and whether they thought of themselves as liberals, moderates, or conservatives. State partisan and ideology indexes were constructed by subtracting the percentage of self-identified Republicans from the percentage of self-identified Democrats and by subtracting the percentage of self-identified conservatives from that of self-identified liberals, respectively.

    Not surprisingly, well-established geographical patterns result. Democrats remain concentrated in the South, while the Plains and Rocky Mountain states are predominantly Republican. Self-identified liberals are most numerous along the Pacific Coast (or "Left Coast") and in the Northeast, whereas the South is most conservative.

    Differences in partisanship and ideology between the states are seen to reflect basic differences in public opinion. These in turn influence the direction of state policy. The distribution of "liberalism" in public policy (involving such issues as consumer protection, the Equal Rights Amendment, legalized gambling, criminal justice, education, Medicaid, and welfare rights) is closely related to that of ideological identification. Governments in the more liberal states tend to deliver more liberal policy packages to their constituents, while more conservative states are associated with more conservative approaches to public policy. Thus the authors argue that "across an impressive range of policies, public opinion counts, and not just a little." Public opinion itself, and not merely surrogates such as income, education, wealth, race, and urbanization, is seen as the key predictor in the direction of public policy within states.

    Having established this argument, the authors consider the role of electoral politics in state policy formation. In general, both parties are more conservative in the more conservative states, and more liberal in the more liberal states. Borrowing from the wellknown model of Anthony Downs, the authors develop models to illustrate the relationships between ideology, partisanship, and policy direction.

    Perhaps the most interesting chapter is chapter 9, which in effect places the maps of ideology and partisanship in historical perspective. The 1976-88 data analyzed in earlier chapters are compared to earlier surveys taken before World War II (1937-39) and during the cold war (1947-1964). Despite the cataclysmic upheavals of U.S. society during the past half century, and despite the fact that the identity of politicians and issues has changed dramatically, the distribution of partisanship has changed little. On the other hand, the distribution of ideology has changed dramatically. Deep South voters were among the more liberal in the nation in the pre-World War II period, but today they describe themselves as more conservative. The distribution of liberalism in the pre-World War II period can, in fact, be interpreted as a measure of support for the New Deal. That the ideological position of the South has changed so dramatically may be a reflection of differences in "how southern and border state residents related to ideological labels" rather than a more fundamental change in state political culture itself.

    The authors' general thesis that public opinion has been a neglected component of policy formation within states provides plenty of food for thought. In particular, researchers can use the analyses presented in Statehouse Democracy as a springboard for more detailed analyses of specific policies and in providing a deeper historical explanation for the development of public opinion across the various states. The book should be of interest to people with research interests in U.S. politics and government, regardless of discipline.