The Changing Face of Abortion Lobbying: A Pre- and Post-Dobbs Analysis

Abstract

This thesis examines the relationship between lobbying spending by Planned Parenthood and National Right to Life and state-level abortion legislative outcomes in the United States from 2014 to 2024. Drawing on resource mobilization theory and political mobilization frameworks, it evaluates whether advocacy spending independently influences policy outcomes or is conditioned by political institutions. Using a quantitative observational panel design, Poisson regression models are employed to analyze the association between lobbying spending and the number of pro-choice and pro-life laws enacted across states. The analysis incorporates measures of partisan institutional control and a post-2022 indicator capturing the policy shift following Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The results indicate that lobbying expenditures align with ideologically consistent legislative outcomes in baseline models. However, institutional variables demonstrate stronger and more consistent effects, substantially reducing the independent influence of spending. Legislative activity increased significantly after Dobbs, though interaction models suggest that lobbying influence itself did not intensify. State-level analyses further show that policy outcomes vary systematically across institutional contexts. These findings suggest that lobbying influence is mediated by political institutions, with federalism producing different policy trajectories across states.