The Institute of Politics at Florida State University (IOP@FSU) is a world-class, nonpartisan, and nationally renowned institute that promotes engagement in politics by students and citizens. Housed within the College of Social Sciences and Public Policy, the IOP@FSU supports applied political research by a cadre of world-class scholars and mobilizes the talents of our alumni, students, faculty, and friends all in the heart of Florida’s Capital City. This research was funded by the IOP@FSU. Learn more about IOP@FSU here.

Local governments are facing a growing challenge. Over the last decade, gubernatorial preemption has become more prevalent and aggressive. Governors continue to preempt their localities over numerous policy domains, such as environmental protection, gun control, the minimum wage, LGBT rights, public transportation, rent control, and immigration customs and enforcement. This preemption is becoming more punitive in nature, with governors issuing penalties, such as fines and state aid cutoffs, to local governments that do not comply (Bulman-Pozen 2018; Hicks and Weissert 2018; Riverstone-Newell 2017; Kogan 2017; Fowler and Witt 2020; Flavin and Shufeldt 2020).

Preemption has also become more partisan in nature (Goodman et al. 2021). Scholars find that when a state government is controlled by a different political party than its local governments, that state will increasingly utilize preemption (Riverstone-Newell 2017; Phillips 2017; Flavin and Shufeldt 2019; Fowler and Witt 2019). The relationship between partisanship and preemption has only strengthened since the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, Democratic governors tended to preempt Republican localities and Republican governors tended to preempt Democratic localities (McDonald et al. 2020; Kincaid and Leckrone 2021). This preemption was not as prevalent when states and localities had co-partisan leadership (Weissert et al. 2021).

However, we know very little about how local officials feel about the preemption they face. To fill this gap, I conduct a survey experiment on a representative sample of U.S. local officials, gauging their attitudes and reactions to hypothetical gubernatorial preemption. I hypothesize that local officials preempted by an out-party governor will oppose preemption more than local officials preempted by an in-party governor.

To test my hypothesis, I conduct a cross-subject survey experiment to examine when and how local officials resist gubernatorial preemption. In this design, every respondent read a hypothetical prompt stating that their local government was being preempted over environmental regulations by their governor. The first treatment group was told they were being preempted by a Democratic governor; the second treatment group was told they were being preempted by a Republican governor. The control group was told they were being preempted by a governor whose party goes unmentioned:

“Consider a situation where you are a local official in a state with a [Republican governor/Democratic governor/governor] who issues a series of new executive orders concerning environmental regulations. The executive orders preempt your local government by prohibiting your local government from enacting its own environmental ordinances or regulations.”

After reading their prompt, respondents were asked, “In this situation, would you support or oppose gubernatorial preemption?”. Answer choices ranged from strongly support (1) to strongly oppose (5).

Figure 1 shows Democratic respondents’ average opposition to preemption. Democrats who received the Republican governor treatment rated their opposition to preemption a 4.42 out of 5. Democrats in the control group rated their opposition to preemption a 3.85. Finally, Democrats in the Democratic governor treatment rated their opposition to preemption a 3.41. Democratic respondents were far less concerned about being preempted when it was done by a co-partisan governor.

Figure 2 shows similar trends for Republican respondents. Republicans who received the Democratic governor treatment rated their opposition to preemption a 4.46 out of 5. Republicans in the control group rated their opposition to preemption a 4.38. Finally, Republicans in the Republican governor treatment rated their opposition to preemption a 3.87.

This survey offers a first attempt at understanding when and how local officials resist gubernatorial preemption. The results of this survey reveal that local officials are more opposed to preemption when it is done by an out-party governor. The results of this survey serve as a cautionary tale to state governments to involve local officials more in decision-making to maintain intergovernmental harmony.