The Dead Hand of the Past?

Toward an Understanding of “Constitutional Veneration”

Appendix

Study 1The first study was conducted using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). We ran two versions of the experiment on different sets of subjects, one testing the effect of a hypothetical proposal to amend the state or federal constitution and another testing the effect of a hypothetical proposal to alter statutory law at the state or federal level. The first version was fielded March 8-10 and the second November 17-19, 2013. Our sample is comprised of 2,088 participants that were at least 18 years old and residents of the United States at the time of the survey. We recruited workers that had an MTurk rating of 70% or above and participants were paid $1 to complete the survey. Respondents who participated in the first version of the study were blocked from participating in the second version of the study.

Summary Statistics for Study 1

1

Treatment and Control Conditions

State Controls (for survey versions 1 and 2)Would you favor a state policy that grants public and private employees in your state the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? Would you favor or oppose this state policy?

Would you favor a state policy that requires a 2/3 majority vote of your state’s House of Representatives and Senate in order to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or to increase the rate of taxation in your state? Would you favor or oppose this state policy?

Federal Controls (for survey versions 1 and 2)Would you favor a federal policy that grants public and private employees across the country the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? Would you favor or oppose this federal policy?

Would you favor a federal policy that requires a 2/3 majority vote of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate in order for the federal government to impose new or additional federal taxes on taxpayers or to increase the rate of federal taxation? Would you favor or oppose this federal policy?

State Constitution Treatments (survey version 1 only)Would you favor an amendment to your state’s constitution that grants public and private employees in your state the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? If approved, this amendment would change your state’s constitution to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this amendment that would change your state’s constitution?

Would you favor an amendment to your state’s constitution that requires a 2/3 majority vote of your state’s House of Representatives and Senate in order to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or to increase the rate of taxation in the state? If approved, this amendment would change your state’s constitution to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would change your state’s constitution?

Federal Constitution Treatments (survey version 1 only)Would you favor an amendment to the United States Constitution that grants public and private employees across the country the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? If approved, this amendment would change the United States Constitution to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this amendment that would change the United States Constitution?

Would you favor an amendment to the United States Constitution that requires a 2/3 majority vote of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate in order for the federal government to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or to increase the rate of federal taxation? If approved, this amendment would change the United States Constitution to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this amendment that would change the United States Constitution?

2

State Law Treatments (survey version 2 only)Would you favor a measure that grants public and private employees in your state the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? If approved, this measure would change your state’s law to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this measure that would change your state’s law?

Would you favor a measure that requires a 2/3 majority vote of your state’s House of Representatives and Senate in order to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or to increase the rate of taxation in the state? If approved, this measure would change your state’s law to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this measure that would change your state’s law?

Federal Law Treatments (survey version 2 only)Would you favor a measure that grants public and private employees across the country the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? If approved, this measure would change federal law to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this measure that would change federal law?

Would you favor a measure that requires a 2/3 majority vote of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate in order for the federal government to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or to increase the rate of federal taxation? If approved, this measure would change federal law to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this measure that would change federal law?

“Constitution Works” Control QuestionsTo gauge respondents’ attitudes toward the U.S. Constitution, we asked them if they agreed with several statements and created a variable measuring the extent to which respondents felt the Constitution “works” even today. All questions were recoded to lie between 0 and 5, where higher values correspond to agreement that the Constitution works well. The overall index ranges from 0 to 20. We included this measure as a control variable for all regression analyses associated with Study 1, including the follow-up study that included the “certainty” condition. We note that we also conducted a principal components analysis of the five constitutional attitudes questions. All five questions loaded onto a single dimension (the eigenvalue associated with the first dimension was 2.65 and the eigenvalues for the remaining dimensions were less than 1), and using a score based on the first dimension factor loadings yielded nearly identical results.

Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements:

The U.S. Supreme Court should interpret the U.S. Constitution in light of the contem- porary problems and circumstances that America faces today.

The U.S. Constitution still works well today and does not need to be changed.

Although the U.S. Constitution still works, it needs some minor changes to better ad- dress present day circumstances.

The U.S. Constitution is outdated and needs major changes to make it adequate to today’s challenges.

[(1) Strongly Agree; (2) Somewhat Agree; (3) Neither Agree nor Disagree; (4) Somewhat Disagree; (5) Strong Disagree]

3

Supplemental Analysis for Study 1

4

5

6

Study 1 Follow-upIn the follow-up study, respondents were randomly assigned to one of four conditions. Three of the conditions – the control, federal statutory change treatment, and federal constitutional change treatment – were exactly the same as in the original study. To these, we added a fourth – a “certainty” scenario. The exact wording of the questions is provided below. The follow-up study was conducted using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) and was fielded on May 4 and June 2 - 3, 2015. Our sample is comprised of 802 participants that were at least 18 years old and residents of the United States at the time of the survey. We recruited workers that had an MTurk rating of 70% or above and participants were paid $1 to complete the survey. The summary statistics are presented below in Appendix Table 4. Respondents who participated in the first version of the study were blocked from participating in the second version of the study.

Summary Statistics for Study 1 Follow-up

7

Treatment and Control Conditions

ControlWould you favor a federal policy that grants public and private employees across the country the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? Would you favor or oppose this federal policy?

Law TreatmentWould you favor a measure that grants public and private employees across the country the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? If approved, this measure would change federal law to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this measure that would change federal law?

Constitution TreatmentWould you favor an amendment to the United States Constitution that grants public and private employees across the country the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions? If approved, this amendment would change the United States Constitution to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this amendment that would change the United States Constitution?

Constitution + Certainty TreatmentWould you favor an amendment to the United States Constitution that grants public and private employees across the country the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions, as long as the amendment were written so that it would not alter the basic structure of federal labor law or fundamentally interfere with the ability of employers to manage their workers? If approved, this amendment would change the United States Constitution to reflect the new policy. Would you favor or oppose this amendment that would change the United States Constitution?

8

Supplemental Analysis for Study 1 Follow-up

9

Study 2In Study 2’s Michigan survey, the initial random assignment for the collective bargaining proposal (Proposal 2) determined whether respondents received treatment or control questions for the other five proposals. Subjects who were randomly assigned to the control group for the collective bargaining proposal received only control questions for the five remaining ballot proposals. Similarly, those who were assigned to the treatment condition for the collective bargaining proposal subsequently received only treatment questions for the remaining proposals. We did this to ensure that respondents could not identify recurring patterns across the six proposal questions that would reveal the experimental manipulation. Although respondents were presented with

either all treatment questions or all control questions for the subsequent proposals, depending on their initial assignment for the collective bargaining proposal, we randomized the order in which the remaining proposals were presented to them.

Respondents in the California survey were randomly assigned to treatment or control conditions for each of the propositions of interest. We determined that respondents likely would not discern the nature of our experimental manipulation, since each respondent was asked about only two (as opposed to six) propositions. Other than the details specific to the California proposals and constitution, the wording of the control and treatment conditions took the same form as those administered in Michigan.

For both surveys, we contracted with the firm Qualtrics (www.qualtrics.com) to solicit subjects and administer our surveys online. The Michigan survey was administered throughout the week leading up to the 2012 general election, from October 30 to November 5. The California survey was administered from November 1 until November 6 (ending at 8 a.m. EST). Individuals first answered a battery of qualifying questions, and those indicating that they are not registered voters in the respective states where we administered the surveys were filtered out and did not participate. Persons who already had voted by absentee ballot or any other form of early voting also were disqualified from participating in the surveys. We have included the exact question wording for both surveys below.

10

Michigan Summary Statistics

Michigan Treatment and Control Questions

Emergency Powers (Proposal 1)

Control: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would authorize the Governor to appoint an emergency manager to act in place of local government officials in municipalities or school districts that have been declared financial emergencies. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure?

Treatment: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would authorize the Governor to appoint an emergency manager to act in place of local government officials in municipalities or school districts that have been declared financial emergencies. If approved, this ballot measure would amend state law to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would change state law?

Collective Bargaining (Proposal 2)

Control: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would grant public and private employees the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure?

Treatment: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would grant public and private employees the right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions. If approved, the ballot measure would amend Article I of Michigan’s state constitution by adding Section 28 to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would

11

change the state constitution?

Renewable Energy (Proposal 3)

Control: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would require electric utilities to provide at least 25% of their annual retail sales of electricity from renewable energy sources, which are wind, solar, biomass, and hydropower, by 2025. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure?

Treatment: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would require electric utilities to provide at least 25% of their annual retail sales of electricity from renewable energy sources, which are wind, solar, biomass, and hydropower, by 2025. If approved, the ballot measure would amend Article III of the Michigan state constitution by adding Section 55 to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would change the state constitution?

Healthcare Workers (Proposal 4)

Control: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would allow in-home care workers to bargain collectively with the Michigan Quality Home Care Council (MQHCC). It would also require MQHCC to provide training for in-home care workers, create a registry of workers who pass background checks, and provide financial services to patients to manage the cost of in-home care. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure?

Treatment: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would allow in- home care workers to bargain collectively with the Michigan Quality Home Care Council (MQHCC). It would also require MQHCC to provide training for in-home care workers, create a registry of workers who pass background checks, and provide financial services to patients to manage the cost of in-home care. If approved, the ballot measure would amend Article V of the Michigan state constitution by adding Section 31 to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would change the state constitution?

2/3 Majority (Proposal 5)

Control: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would require a 2/3 majority vote of the State House and the State Senate, or a statewide vote of the people at a November election, in order for the State of Michigan to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or increase the rate of taxation. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure?

Treatment: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would require a 2/3 majority vote of the State House and the State Senate, or a statewide vote of the people at a November election, in order for the State of Michigan to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or increase the rate of taxation. If approved, the ballot measure would amend Article IX of the Michigan state constitution by adding Section 26a to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would change the state constitution?

Canada Bridge (Proposal 6)

Control: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would require

12

voters to approve any new bridge or tunnel for motor vehicles from Michigan to Canada. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure?

Treatment: On November 6, Michigan voters will decide on a ballot measure that would require voters to approve any new bridge or tunnel for motor vehicles from Michigan to Canada. If approved, the ballot measure would amend Article III of the Michigan state constitution by adding Section 6a to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would change the state constitution?

Michigan Information & Importance Control Questions

We would like to ask you a few questions about the ballot measures that will appear on Michigan’s ballot on November 6. There are six ballot measures.

Proposal 1 would authorize the governor to appoint an emergency manager to replace officials in school districts and municipalities that have been declared financial emergencies.

Please indicate HOW IMPORTANT Proposal 1 is to you personally. [Extremely im- portant (1); Very important (2); Moderately important (3); Slightly important (4); Not at all important (5)]

Please indicate HOW INFORMED you are about the details of Proposal 1. [Very well- informed (1); Well-informed (2); Neither well-informed or uninformed (3); Somewhat uninformed (4); Uninformed (5)]

Proposal 2 would secure collective bargaining rights for public and private employees.

Please indicate HOW IMPORTANT Proposal 2 is to you personally.

Please indicate HOW INFORMED you are about the details of Proposal 2.

Proposal 3 would require utility companies to generate electricity from renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, biomass, and hydropower.

Please indicate HOW IMPORTANT Proposal 3 is to you personally.

Please indicate HOW INFORMED you are about the details of Proposal 3.

Proposal 4 would allow in-home care workers to collectively bargain with the Michigan Quality Home Care Council.

Please indicate HOW IMPORTANT Proposal 4 is to you personally.

Please indicate HOW INFORMED you are about the details of Proposal 4.

Proposal 5 would require that any new or additional taxes must be approved by a 2/3 majority vote in the state legislature.

Please indicate HOW IMPORTANT Proposal 5 is to you personally.

Please indicate HOW INFORMED you are about the details of Proposal 5.

13

Proposal 6 would require voter approval for any new bridge or tunnel between Michigan and Canada.

Please indicate HOW IMPORTANT Proposal 6 is to you personally.

Please indicate HOW INFORMED you are about the details of Proposal 6.

14

California Summary Statistics

California Treatment and Control Conditions

Education Tax (Proposition 30)

Control: On November 6, California voters will decide on a ballot measure that would increase taxes on earnings over $250,000 for seven years and increase the sales tax by 1/4 cent for four years in order to fund schools. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure?

Treatment: On November 6, California voters will decide on a ballot measure that would increase taxes on earnings over $250,000 for seven years and increase the sales tax by 1/4 cent for four years in order to fund schools. If approved, this ballot measure would amend Article XIII of the California state constitution to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would change the state constitution?

Death Penalty (Proposition 34)

Control: On November 6, California voters will decide on a ballot measure that would eliminate the death penalty in California and replace it with life in prison without the possibility of parole. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure?

Treatment: On November 6, California voters will decide on a ballot measure that would elimi- nate the death penalty in California and replace it with life in prison without the possibility of parole. If approved, this ballot measure would amend California state law to reflect the new policy. Do you favor or oppose this ballot measure that would change state law to eliminate the death penalty?

California Information & Importance Control Questions

We would like to ask you a few questions about two of the ballot measures that will appear on California’s ballot on November 6.

Proposition 30 would increase taxes on earnings over $250,000 for seven years and increase the

15

sales tax by 1/4 cent for four years in order to fund schools.

Please indicate HOW IMPORTANT Proposition 30 is to you personally. [Extremely important (1); Very important (2); Moderately important (3); Slightly important (4); Not at all important (5)]

Please indicate HOW INFORMED you are about the details of Proposition 30. [Very well-informed (1); Well-informed (2); Neither well-informed or uninformed (3); Some- what uninformed (4); Uninformed (5)]

Proposition 34 would eliminate the death penalty in California and replace it with life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Please indicate HOW IMPORTANT Proposition 34 is to you personally.

Please indicate HOW INFORMED you are about the details of Proposition 34.

16

Supplemental Analysis for Study 2The regression results for our Michigan and California studies are presented in Appendix Table 8 and Appendix Figure 3. We estimate a logistic regression of support for the status quo, where opposition to the proposed ballot measure implies support for the status quo, on a treatment indicator. We include control variables for age, gender, race, level of education, income, ideology, risk aversion, and individual-level measures of issue importance and knowledge of the proposals. A detailed description of the questions used for these variables is included above in this Appendix.

We also provide additional analysis focusing on our treatment effects among Democrats in the Michigan collective bargaining scenario (Proposal 2), who in principle should have been strongly inclined to vote in favor of the proposed amendment on both policy and certainty grounds. Those results are presented in Appendix Table 9 and Appendix Figure 4.

Our treatment in Study 2 was designed to isolate constitutional status quo bias as the motivation for voting against a proposal that alters the state constitution, but it is possible the treatment instead is prompting subjects to focus on the inherent uncertainty associated with any new proposal. If voters, who generally have limited information, are unsure about a new policy, they will be inclined to stick with the known status quo. If our findings are attributable to uncertainty rather than constitutional status quo bias, then we would expect our treatment highlighting constitutional change to have less of an effect on those subjects who report knowing more about a ballot measure. In addition, the treatment should have a greater effect on more risk-averse subjects (Bowler and Donovan 1998; Kam 2012; Kam and Simas 2010, 2012).

To account for these possibilities, we utilize individual-level measures elicited as part of our Michigan survey. To gauge familiarity with the ballot measures, we asked respondents to indicate how informed they were about the details of each proposal on a five-point scale ranging from “uninformed” to “very well informed.” As a measure of risk aversion, we asked subjects to place themselves on an eleven-point continuum of willingness to take risks ranging from “fully prepared to take risks” to “unwilling to take risks.”

The additional analysis is presented in Appendix Table 10. In the first column, support for each of the five constitutional amendments is regressed on our measure of how informed respondents reported being about the measure, as well as whether or not they were given the treatment. The interaction between receiving the treatment and the level of information provides a test of whether the treatment effect differs among subjects with higher versus lower levels of information regarding each of the proposed constitutional amendments. The second column employs the same approach for the measures of risk aversion. Since we included all five choices for each subject, robust clustered standard errors at the individual level are reported. The interactions demonstrate that the effect of our treatment was not significantly weaker among individuals who reported being more informed about each proposal (p = 0.20). In principle, individuals who are well informed about a proposal should be more certain of the consequences of the proposed change. As such, they should be less susceptible to our treatment highlighting the constitutional status quo and instead should act on their preferences on the underlying issue. However, we find no significant difference in treatment effect based on respondents’ level of knowledge about the proposals. Similarly, the effect of our treatment was not significantly reduced among more risk averse individuals (p = 0.42), which indicates that our results are not simply attributable to a more general status quo bias rooted in risk aversion and uncertainty.

17

18

19

20

References

Bowler, Shaun and Todd Donovan. 1998. Demanding Choices. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Kam, Cindy D. 2012. “Risk Attitudes and

Political Participation.” American Journal of Political Science 56(4):817–36.

Kam, Cindy D. and Elizabeth N. Simas. 2010. “Risk Orientations and Policy Frames.” Journal of Politics 72(2):381–396.

Kam, Cindy D. and Elizabeth N. Simas. 2012. “Risk Attitudes, Candidate

Characteristics, and Vote Choice.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76(4):747–760.

21