Karatekin, CananMason, Susan M.Latner, MichaelGresham, BriaCorcoran, FrederiqueHing, AnnaBarnes, Andrew J.2023-10-262023-10-262023-10-26https://hdl.handle.net/11299/257790The files include the "readme for the partisan bias study" text document that provides an overview of the study and details about the other two files, the Excel file that has all the raw data for the study (Partisan bias study data.xls) and the R script used to analyze the data (Partisan bias study R script).Increasing evidence suggests that state policies impact constituents' health, but political determinants of health and health inequities remain understudied. Using state and year fixed-effects models, we determined the extent to which changes in electoral partisan bias in lower chambers of U.S. state legislatures (i.e., discrepancy between statewide vote share and seat share) were followed by changes in five state policies affecting children and families (1980-2019) and a composite of safety net programs (1999-2018). We examined effects on each policy and whether the effect was modified when bias was accompanied by unified party control. Next, we determined whether the effect differed depending on which party it favored. Less bias resulted only in higher AFDC/TANF benefits. Both pro-Democratic and pro-Republican bias was followed by decreased AFDC/TANF benefits and increased Medicaid benefits. AFDC/TANF recipients, unemployment benefits, minimum wage, and pre-K-12 education spending increased following pro-Democratic bias and decreased following pro-Republican bias. Estimated effects on the composite measure of safety net policies were all close to null. Some effects were modulated by unified party control. Results demonstrate that increasing fairness in elections is not a panacea by itself for increasing generosity of programs affecting children’s well-being. Indeed, bias can be somewhat beneficial for the expansiveness of some policies. Furthermore, with the exception of unemployment benefits and AFDC/TANF recipients, Democrats have not been using the additional power that comes with electoral bias to spend more on major programs that benefit children. Finally, after decades in which electoral bias was in Democrats’ favor, bias has started to shift toward Republicans in the last decade. This trend forecasts more cuts in almost all the policies in this study, especially education and AFDC/TANF recipients. There is a need for more research and advocacy emphasis on the political determinants of social determinants of health, especially at the state level.Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United Stateshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/Political determinants of healthsocial determinants of health and health inequitiespartisan biasTANFMedicaideducation spendingunemployment benefitsminimum wageDatasethttps://doi.org/10.13020/62rc-r153