Abstract
This paper examines two disconnects between they way the scholarly literature has
tended to theorize about the policy process and the manner in which most empirical
analysis on public policy has proceeded. I contend that while most theoretical models of
the policy process include both public opinion and interest groups as key components,
empirical research most often neglects one or the other. Second, despite the theoretical
recognition that policy processes may vary by the nature of the policy area, much of the
empirical research usually ignores this type of variation. Examining three state policy
areas, this analysis finds that both public opinion and interest groups have significant
impacts on policy outcomes. The results also suggest that there are, indeed, significant
differences in the determinants of the three policy areas.
2