The summary of ‘Eric Patashnik — Countermobilization: Policy Feedback and Backlash in a Polarized Age’

00:00:00

In this part of the video, Wendy Schiller introduces the event and outlines the credentials of Eric Patashnik, the featured author, as well as his book, “Countermobilization, Policy Feedback, and Backlash in a Polarized Age.” Schiller highlights the impressive panel of political scientists, including Andrea Louise Campbell, David Mayhew, and James Morone, providing their academic backgrounds and notable contributions to political science. Eric Patashnik then offers an overview of his book, focusing on the role of backlash politics in the American state since the 1960s. He emphasizes the importance of understanding backlash as it has been central to American politics, citing examples like union backlash against NAFTA, opposition to Obamacare, and the backlash to the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision. Patashnik adopts a neutral definition of backlash to analyze a variety of historical events and policy feedback effects on political contestation.

00:10:00

In this part of the video, the discussion centers around the concept of policy backlash, its causes, and its consequences in the political landscape. The speaker highlights how policies sometimes create supportive coalitions but can also stimulate resistance among mass publics or organized groups. Factors contributing to backlash include increased polarization, cultural shifts, and the expansion of federal activities. The speaker elaborates on a framework to predict backlash, examining motives, resources, and political opportunities that affect backlash likelihood. Statistical analysis and case studies reveal the patterns and actors involved in backlash events, showing that both conservative and liberal backlashes have become more prevalent. The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of understanding backlash to design enduring policy reforms.

00:20:00

In this part of the video, Professor Andrea Campbell from MIT discusses Eric Patashnik’s book, highlighting its significant contribution to understanding policy feedbacks. She emphasizes that policy consequences often only become apparent post-enactment, leading to backlash from organized interests. Campbell raises several questions for future research, including the ideological direction of backlash, the role of private actors, resource disparities in countermobilization, public engagement in policy backlash, and the application of these theories to state-level politics. She underscores the complexity and richness of the topic, suggesting that additional investigation could offer deeper insights into these dynamics.

00:30:00

In this segment of the video, the discussion focuses on the concept of political learning and backlash in policy design. It acknowledges that states often learn from each other’s experiences to avoid policy backlash. The conversation then shifts to conservative strategies that not only counter liberal policies but aim to reshape fundamental rules and institutions to prevent future liberal retaliation. This includes actions like appointing sympathetic judges, using preemption to undermine local policymaking, and restricting voting rights. Additionally, there is mention of a book by Eric, praised for its comprehensive data and insightful analysis, particularly on policy backlash from the 1960s to the present. Various historical examples of backlash, such as the reaction to the Affordable Care Act and other significant political decisions, are highlighted to demonstrate the evolution and impact of this phenomenon over time.

00:40:00

In this segment, the discussion revolves around the complexity of policy design and the consequences of poorly designed policies. David Mayhew reflects on historical examples, such as the Social Security Act of 1935 and the Highway Act of 1956, which were well-crafted, versus the poorly designed 18th Amendment. He emphasizes that policies prone to backlash often have design flaws. Eric Patashnik advises policymakers on creating robust policies resistant to backlash. David critiques this approach, questioning why backlash should be avoided rather than understood as a potential outcome. Jim Morone praises the book under discussion, noting its intricate analysis of the interplay between policy and politics, and poses questions about the Affordable Care Act’s implementation and challenges faced by policymakers like Obama.

00:50:00

In this part of the video, the discussion covers various facets of political backlash and its role in American politics. Key points include the persistence and institutionalization of backlash in the political system, notably how it sometimes embeds itself as part of the state apparatus. The interaction between business and politics is examined, emphasizing that business involvement in politics is sometimes necessary despite the risks.

Questions are raised about the long-term nature of backlash, using abortion as an example to determine if prolonged contention still counts as backlash. The speaker also questions the boundaries of backlash, and how time influences its classification. Additionally, there is a conversation on the racial aspects of political backlash, particularly how civil rights issues have historically intersected with anti-government sentiments within political coalitions.

Moreover, the video highlights the strategic importance of backlash for political actors, even corporate elites, suggesting that despite potential public conflicts, backlash can be crucial for achieving certain goals. The effectiveness of backlash in a democracy, particularly regarding policy and administration changes, is debated, with concerns about the public’s ability to mobilize against covert but significant policy shifts. Lastly, the speaker touches on whether conservative movements have been more effective at harnessing backlash compared to liberals.

01:00:00

In this part of the video, the speaker discusses the strategic adaptations conservatives undertook to counteract unfavorable government actions in the 1960s-70s by building organizations like the Federalist Society over the long term. It highlights the need for progressives to similarly entrench their programs and build durable constituencies before increasing the progressivity of benefits, using Social Security as an example. The discussion moves to audience questions, addressing the nature of perceived policy threats and backlash, with emphasis on elite and mass public roles in such phenomena. Specific examples include the Affordable Care Act and the partisan dynamics influencing backlash. The speaker also explores the potential future backlash to the Inflation Reduction Act, noting its design to avoid direct costs to citizens and comparing it to past policies like cap and trade. Finally, there are comments on implicit racial issues underlying political actions, using historical examples for context.

01:10:00

In this part of the video, Eric Patashnik discusses the role of race in policy backlash, specifically focusing on the civil rights movement and the Affordable Care Act (ACA). He emphasizes that while race plays a significant role, the content and perception of policies are also crucial. Patashnik explains that although the ACA faced significant backlash, particularly influenced by racial factors, its relatively moderate approach allowed it to pass and survive, unlike a more ambitious policy which likely would not have. He insists that the substance of policies matters and should not be overlooked.

Subsequently, Diva Woodley raises a question regarding the differential effectiveness of backlash, exploring how different backlashes impact political consequences, policy effectiveness, public opinion, and coalition shifts. Patashnik acknowledges the complexity of the issue, noting that backlash can influence various outcomes such as the sustainability of reforms and public opinion. He also highlights the importance of strategic considerations for political actors, suggesting that sometimes provoking backlash can be a deliberate strategy to demonstrate credibility. Wendy Schiller concludes the panel, thanking the presenters, including Professors Patashnik, Campbell, Mayhew, and Moroney.