Defining Dixie: A State-Level Measure of the Modern Political South
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2004.25.0.25-39Abstract
Despite volumes of research, there is little agreement on which states to include in the modern political South. In this paper, we analyze state-level demographic, political, public opinion, and policy outcome data to evaluate the distinctiveness of the eleven states of the old Confederacy. Next, we combine the public opinion and policy outcomes unique to the old Confederacy states to create an index of political southernness. Our scale of southernness suggests that the traditional definitions of the region need to be reevaluated. For example, we find that Oklahoma and Kentucky score high on our scale, while Tennessee, Virginia, and especially Texas are much less politically southern.References
Abramowitz, Alan I., and H. Gibbs Knotts. 2004. Ideological Realignment in the American Electorate: A Comparison of Northern and Southern White Voters in the Pre-Reagan, Reagan, and Post-Reagan Eras. Presented at the Citadel Symposium on Southern Politics, March 2004. Americans for Democratic Action. 2004. ADA Voting Records. http://www.adaaction.org/votingrecords.htm.
Applebome, Peter. 1996. Dixie Rising: How the South is Shaping American Values, Politics, and Culture. New York: Times Books.
Bass, Jack, and Walter DeVries. 1976. The Transformation of Southern Politics: Social Change and Political Consequences Since 1945. New York: Basic Books.
Beck, Paul Allen, and Paul Lopatto. 1982. The End of Southern Distinctiveness. In Studies in Contemporary Southern Political Attitudes and Behavior, eds. Todd Baker, Laurence W. Moreland, and Robert P. Steed. New York: Praeger.
Bibby, John F., and Thomas M. Holbrook. 2004. Parties and Elections. In Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis, eds. Virginia Gray and Russell L. Hanson. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Black, Earl, and Merle Black. 1987. Politics and Society in the South. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Black, Earl, and Merle Black. 1992. The Vital South. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674734579
Black, Earl, and Merle Black. 2002. The Rise of Southern Republicans. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bullock, Charles S., and Mark J. Rozell, eds. 2003. The New Politics of the Old South, 2d ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Cash, W.J. 1941. The Mind of the South. New York: Knopf.
Erikson, Robert S., Gerald C. Wright, and John P. McIver. 1993. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Eshbaugh-Soha, Matt, and Kenneth J. Meier. 2004. Economic and Social Regulation. In Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis, eds. Virginia Gray and Russell L. Hanson. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Gaddie, Ronald Keith, and Gary W. Copeland. 2003. Oklahoma: The Secular Realignment Continues. In The New Politics of the Old South, 2d ed., eds. Virginia Gray and Russell L. Hanson. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Garand, James C., and Kyle Baudoin. 2004. Fiscal Policy in the American States. In Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis, eds. Virginia Gray and Russell L. Hanson. Washington DC: CQ Press.
Glaser, James. 1996. Race, Campaign Politics, and the Realignment in the South. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Glen, Norval D., and J.L. Simmons. 1967. Are Regional Cultural Differences Diminishing? The Public Opinion Quarterly 31:176-193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/267512
Gray, Virginia, and David Lowery. 1999. The Underpopulated Interest Communities of the South: Partially Decomposing a Dummy Variable. Southeastern Political Review 27:748-762. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.1999.tb00559.x
Gray, Virginia, David Lowery, Matthew Fellowes, and Andrea McAttee. 2004. Public Opinion, Public Policy, and Organized Interests in the American States. Political Research Quarterly Forthcoming. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591290405700306 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3219851
Green, John C., Lyman A. Kellstedt, Corwin E. Smidt, and James L. Guth. 2003. The Soul of the South: Religion and Southern Politics at the Millennium. In The New Politics of the Old South, 2d ed., eds. Charles S. Bullock and Mark J. Rozell. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Hurlbert, Jeanne. 1989. The Southern Region: A Test of the Hypothesis of Cultural Distinctiveness. Sociological Quarterly 30:245-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1989.tb01521.x
Kazee, Thomas A. 1998. North Carolina: Conservatism, Traditionalism, and the GOP. In The New Politics of the Old South, eds. Charles S. Bullock and Mark J. Rozell. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Key, V.O. 1949. Southern Politics in State and Nation. New York: Knopf.
Kuklinski, James H., Michael D. Cobb, and Martin Gilens 1997. Racial Attitudes and the 'New South.' The Journal of Politics 59:323-349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022381600053470
Lamis, Alexander P. 1984. The Two Party South. New York: Oxford University Press.
Leip, David. 2004. Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. http://www.uselectionatlas.org.
Lieske, Joel. 1993. Regional Subcultures of the United States. The Journal of Politics 55:888-913. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131941
Norrander, Barbara. 2001. Measuring State Public Opinion with the Senate National Election Study. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 1:111-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/153244000100100107
Poole, Keith T., and Howard Rosenthal 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Reed, John Shelton. 1974. The Enduring South: Subcultural Persistence in Mass Society. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Reed, John Shelton. 1982. One South: An Ethnic Approach to Regional Culture. Baton Rouge: University of Louisiana Press.
Rice, Tom W., William P. McLean, and Amy J. Larsen. 2002. Southern Distinctiveness over Time: 1972-2000. American Review of Politics 23:193-220.
Rozell, Mark. 2002. Virginia: The New Politics of the Old Dominion. In The New Politics of the Old South, 2d ed., eds. Charles S. Bullock and Mark J. Rozell. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Schreckhise, William D., and Todd G. Shields. 2003. Ideological Realignment in the Contemporary U.S. Electorate Revisited. Social Science Quarterly 84:596-612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-6237.8403007
Steed, Robert P., Laurence W. Moreland, and Tod A. Baker. 1990. Searching for the Mind of the South in the Second Reconstruction. In The Disappearing South?, eds. Robert P. Steed, Laurence W. Moreland, and Tod A. Baker. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
Stein, Robert M. 1999. Devolution and Challenge for State and Local Governance. In American State and Local Politics: Directions for the 21st Century, eds. Ronald E. Weber and Paul Brace. New York: Chatham House Publishers.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 2000. Census of Population and Housing. Data User Services Division, Washington, DC.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
