Local Laboratories of Democracy and Greater Gun Safety Preempted.

Golembeski, Cynthia A; Golembeski, Cynthia A

We provide analysis of panel data examining state-level firearm preemption laws in 50 states. Municipal regulations typically focus on child and consumer safety, firearm ownership, permit requirements, weapon classes, transfers and sales, as well as firearm sales and dealing. States have long had the capacity and authority to preempt local ordinances. Earlier state preemption efforts coalesced around gun and smoking regulations in response to successful local public health advocacy to institute restrictions and bans throughout the 1980s and 1990s (Pomeranz et al. 2017; Briffault 2018). Nearly every state preempts local gun regulation to varying degree, often with overwhelming support of the National Rifle Association (NRA) (Blocher 2013). Scharff (2018) underscores three arguments for local control: 1) local control may allow a divided populace a better chance of maximizing policy preferences. 2) local control may best address more localized challenges. 3) local control may afford additional “laboratories of democracy.”

U.S. cities and progressive localism are vulnerable to state measures that erode the capacity for local decision-making and innovation toward increasing equity and economic opportunities. The National League of Cities converges with recent literature on preemption in identifying potential factors associated with an increase in state preemption, which include, lobbying efforts; single party dominance in the majority of state governments; and social sorting (DuPuis et al. 2018; Riverstone-Newell 2017). In some domains, states preempt localities from regulating but do not enact any equivalent state-level laws in that policy domain (Briffault 2018). This creates a policy vacuum that leaves residents without that policy available to them. For instance, urban core areas may contend with distinct challenges associated with firearms, such as violence, that differ from those in suburban or more rural areas with potentially different constituents.

This project will contribute to current research literature on social determinants of health in increasing an understanding of the scope and scale of preemption nationwide as well as the potential penalties and benefits borne by constituents and local communities specific to firearm ordinances. Select variables include presence of: Dillon Rule; Home Rule; Republican Party control; lobbying; and punitive preemption: Personal liability; fiscal sanctions; and nuclear preemption, which seeks to obliterate a locality’s ability to regulate entire sectors of the government. We also include various socio-economic and health factors.

Furthermore, we provide case study analysis of how progressive localism has sought to challenge state efforts toward thwarting local measures toward increasing equity and improving health. Swanson and Barrilleaux (2018) assess factors driving local governments to adopt incongruent policies in relation to the state by measuring the absolute difference in ideology scores using Shor and McCarty’s (2011) data set. We employ text analysis to categorize the ordinances of local governments that regulate an area of law that a state statute has already expressly preempted in order to measure direct limitations to local governance.

Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

DC Accepted Papers Paper: Local Laboratories of Democracy and Greater Gun Safety Preempted.

Navigation