Agenda Setting for the Vulnerable: Exploring State Legislators’ Sponsorship of Child Welfare Legislation

Abstract

This study seeks to understand what factors contribute to bill sponsorship by state legislators to address child welfare reform. Guided by Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Framework, this mixed-methods study employs quantitative and qualitative analyses to investigate influential variables in the identification of and commitment to a child welfare related problem, selection of a policy solution, and a receptive policy environment. In addition, this study evaluates effective strategies employed by policy entrepreneurs to guide child welfare policy reform onto the institutional agenda. A stratified random sample of state-level child welfare legislation introduced between 2012 and 2021 was coded and analyzed to identify state and legislator characteristics that are related to the sponsorship of child welfare system policy; results of this portion indicate significant statistical differences between individual-level characteristics and topics of sponsored child welfare legislation, as well as the relationship of topics of child welfare legislation and state-level characteristics. Interviews with legislators in three states reveal themes among sponsors related to the problem stream, policy stream, and politics stream. Sponsoring legislators indicated that their awareness of child welfare problems in need of government intervention was impacted by resident contact, professional and personal experience with the child welfare system, and awareness of a tragic “focusing event.” Selection of policy solutions were inspired by appeal to personal values, political feasibility, policies that “make sense,” and public support. Legislators reported political influences on their decision to sponsor included political party tension, their future ambitions as an elected official, and the perceived receptivity of the executive branch to proposed policy reform. Legislators consistently described successful policy entrepreneur strategies, which included sharing the perspective of individuals with lived experience, selecting the “right” legislator to champion their cause, and utilizing targeted opposition to shape policy. The integration of analyses from both quantitative and qualitative portions of this study highlights the importance of a strategic policy entrepreneur, prioritizing political strategy, and centering lived experience as a crucial part of a policy campaign.