Political frames of public health crises: Discussing the opioid epidemic in the US Congress

When and how do politicians talk about public health crises? Using evidence from the opioid crisis in the United States, this paper assembles and analyzes novel data on Congressional statements to explore the conditions under which politicians (1) issue public statements about opioids and (2) frame the opioid crisis as a predominantly public health or law enforcement problem. We examined 3.8 million Congressional floor speeches and 111,000 public statements to identify (1) floor speeches about drug crises in the 97th to 114th Congresses (1981–2017) and (2) public statements about the opioid crisis in the 116th Congress (2019–2020). Moderate ideology, women, greater overdose deaths, and larger white populations are associated with significantly higher frequencies of opioid statements. Using a dictionary-based text analysis approach, we find that ideologically liberal and African American legislators are more likely to use public health framing, while ideologically conservative members are more likely to use law enforcement framing and refer to national borders or foreign countries in opioid statements. Democrats/liberals more often referenced medication treatment for opioids. These findings imply two broader conclusions about the nature of political discourse in public health crises. First, that political extremists are least likely to talk about opioids suggests that increasing partisan polarization may result in less discussion, emphasis, and expertise in public health issues. Second, the tenor of discourse about opioids and other public health crises is likely to change with partisan electoral waves, potentially hindering long term planning of public health capacity.