Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:58:51.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Demographic profile of states with human cloning laws: Morality policy, meets political economy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Bonnie Stabile
Bonnie Stabile*
Affiliation:
School of Public Policy, George Mason University, 3401 Fairfax Drive, MS 3B1, Arlington, Virginia 22201 [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This analysis seeks to identify factors that may shape the policy stance — whether restrictive or permissive — that each state in the United States with a human cloning law in place takes toward human therapeutic cloning. The investigation also considers if cloning policy is more the product of morality politics or political economy. Results show that among states with human cloning policies in place, those with a greater biotechnological capacity, more permissive abortion laws, fewer Evangelical Protestants, and higher political liberalism rankings are more likely to have permissive cloning laws. A higher Roman Catholic population is strongly associated with permissive cloning laws, rather than restrictive cloning laws as originally supposed. Factors with morality policy and economic bases were both found to be associated with cloning policy outcomes. Results suggest that morality policies, though distinct in some ways, do share determinants with public policies based on political economy.

Type
Research Article
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , March 2007 , pp. 43 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

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

1.Wald, Kenneth D., Button, James W., and Rienzo, Barbara A., “Morality Politics vs. Political Economy: The Case of School-Based Health Centers,” Social Science Quarterly, 2001, 82:221.Google Scholar
2.Mooney, Christopher Z. and Lee, Mei-Hsien, “Legislating Morality in the American States: The Case of Pre-Roe Abortion Regulation Reform,” American Journal of Political Science, 1995, 39 (August):600.Google Scholar
3.Meier, Kenneth J., “Drugs, Sex, and Rock and Roll: A Theory of Morality Politics,” in The Public Clash of Private Values: The Politics of Morality Policy, Mooney, Christopher Z., ed. (New York: Chatham House, 2001), p. 22.Google Scholar
4.Studlar, Donley T., “What Constitutes Morality Policy? A Cross-National Analysis,” in The Public Clash of Private Values: The Politics of Morality Policy, Mooney, Christopher Z., ed. (New York: Chatham House, 2001), p. 38.Google Scholar
5.Studlar, , “What Constitutes Morality Policy? A Cross-National Analysis,” p. 39.Google Scholar
6.Haider-Markel, Donald P., “Morality in Congress? Legislative Voting on Gay Issues,” in The Public Clash of Private Values: The Politics of Morality Policy, Mooney, Christopher Z., ed. (New York: Chatham House, 2001), p. 116.Google Scholar
7.Mooney, Christopher Z., “The Decline of Federalism and the Rise of Morality-Policy Conflict in the United States,” Publius, 2000, 30 (Winter):171–188.Google Scholar
8.Meier, Kenneth J. and McFarlane, Deborah R., “The Politics of Funding Abortion: State Responses to the Political Environment,” American Politics Quarterly, 1993 (January):85.Google Scholar
9.Lowi, Theodore J., “Foreward: New Dimensions in Policy and Politics,” in Social Regulatory Policy: Moral Controversies in American Politics, Tatalovich, Raymond and Daynes, Byron W., eds. (Boulder and London: Westview Press, 1988) pp. x–xxi.Google Scholar
10.Tatalovich, Raymond and Daynes, Byron W., eds., Social Regulatory Policy: Moral Controversies in American Politics (Boulder and London: Westview Press, 1988).Google Scholar
11.Martyn, Susan R., “Human Cloning: The Role of Law,” University of Toledo Law Review, 2001, 32 (Spring):375–386.Google Scholar
12.National Conference of State Legislatures, “State Human Cloning Laws,” 2005, National Conference of State Legislatures, http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/rt-shcl.htm (updated June 21).Google Scholar
13.Daniel Sneider, “Rush by States to Ban Cloning Draws Ire, Again and Again,” The Christian Science Monitor, 21 March 1997:1.Google Scholar
14.Tobler, Laura, “The Cloning Conundrum,” State Legislatures Magazine, 1998, 23 (October):36–37.Google Scholar
15.Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, “As Congress Stalls, States Pursue Cloning Debate,” The New York Times, 26 May 2002, http://www.nytimes.com.Google Scholar
16.McNeil, Donald G. Jr., “Sect Claims First Cloned Baby,” The New York Times, 27 December 2002, http://www.nytimes.com.Google Scholar
17.Madigan, Erin, “Bills to Ban Human Cloning Multiply in States,” Stateline.org, 13 March 2003, http://www.stateline.org.Google Scholar
18.Gray, Virginia, “The Socioeconomic and Political Context of States,” in Politics in the American States (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2004), p. 3.Google Scholar
19.National Conference of State Legislatures, “State Human Cloning Laws.”Google Scholar
20.U.S. Census Bureau, “American Fact Finder,” 2000, http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts?_sse=on.Google Scholar
21.National Science Foundation, “Science and Engineering Statistics: R&D expenditures,” 2003, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf05320/pdf/table25.pdf.Google Scholar
22.Alan Guttmacher Institute, “State Facts About Abortion,” 2005, http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/index.html.Google Scholar
23.Adam Sonfield and Vitoria Lin, “Reproductive Health-Related Developments in the States in 2002,” The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, 2002, 5(October), http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/05/4/gr050411.html.Google Scholar
24.American Religion Data Archive, 2005, http://www.thearda.com.Google Scholar
25.Reichhardt, Tony, Cyranoski, David, and Schiermeier, Quirin, “Religion and science: Studies of faith,” Nature, 8 December 2004, http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041206/pf/432666a_pf.html.Google Scholar
26.O'Connor, Robert E. and Berkman, Michael E., “Religious Determinants of State Abortion Policy,” Social Science Quarterly, 1995, 76:447–459.Google Scholar
27.Meier, and McFarlane, , “The Politics of Funding Abortion: State Responses to the Political Environment,” p. 92.Google Scholar
28.O'Connor, and Berkman, , “Religious Determinants of State Abortion Policy.”Google Scholar
29.Goodstein, Laurie, “Evangelicals Open Debate on Widening Policy Questions,” The New York Times, 11 March 2005, http://www.nytimes.com.Google Scholar
30.Gastner, Michael, Shalizi, Cosma, and Newman, Mark, “Maps and cartograms of the 2004 US presidential election results,” 2004, http://wwwpersonal.umich.edu/∼mejn/election.Google Scholar
31.U.S. Census Bureau, “American Fact Finder.”Google Scholar