Coalition Dynamics in Wicked Policy Debates: Gender Identity Legislation in Colorado

This study examines the political discourse of policy actors engaged in legislative testimony debate surrounding reducing restrictions on updating gender identification on birth certificates in Colorado, US. This bill is one of Colorado’s first legislative debates on gender identity, a wicked problem where the policy problems and solutions differ vastly and are centered around human rights. Two opposing coalitions emerge from the discourse in this conflict, who vastly vary with their problem definitions and solutions as they compete to have Colorado policy reflect their values. These problems, solutions, and values are all inherent to coalitional dynamics and observable through the emotions and beliefs shared in their discourse. Thus, this paper analyzes the different emotional expressions and beliefs of these opposing groups and asks: what are the characteristics of Colorado transgender coalitions in legislative debates? Using the Advocacy Coalition Framework and the use of semi-automated coding, it identifies the unique emotion-beliefs of each policy actor across one bill that was debated during four time periods between 2015-2019. These debates center around deep core issues of gender identity and secondary attributes surrounding policy implementation, offering a unique case that straddles the textbook Advocacy Coalition policy core beliefs.