While a number of US state-level entities have been receptive to efforts by China to re-establish connections, there is an increasing trend of governors and state legislators initiating and implementing a significant number of effective actions aimed at reducing the risks associated with China’s activities. This is largely driven by concerns about security, aiming to address policy gaps.

This detailed study highlights these recent moves, showcasing significant trends using three new datasets. These include 167 China-related excerpts from 941 state of state addresses by US governors from 2005 to 2024, and over 600 China-related measures proposed in US state legislatures in 2023 and 2024. The data is methodically organized across 12 variables including sentiment and topic addressed.

From 2005 to 2019, US governors generally portrayed China positively in their state of state addresses, emphasizing economic partnerships and educational exchanges. However, unfavorable mentions of China started to appear prominently in 2022, when Republican governors from five states referenced China while discussing sensitive topics like abortion, supply chain security and intellectual property issues.

In 2023 and 2024, the number of governors mentioning China in their addresses increased, with issues ranging from supply chain security to foreign land purchases and AI development being discussed. Some governors even highlighted their state’s legislative agendas to counter China.

Alongside the change in rhetoric from state-level politicians, China-related issues became more prominent in US gubernatorial campaign narratives from 2022 to 2024. China-related topics such as land purchases, foreign influence, and cybersecurity were incorporated into campaign narratives by candidates in several states.

This shift in rhetoric from US governors reflects broader changes in state-level approaches toward China-related issues, as evidenced by the volume and scope of measures introduced across state legislatures in 2023 and 2024. This will be the subject of future articles in this series.

Note: The information for this study was sourced from records compiled by the Education Commission of the States, Ballotpedia, and the National Governors Association, along with supplementary research.

Acknowledgements: This research was supported by the Foreign Policy Research Institute’s Templeton Fellowship. Feedback was provided by a number of distinguished professionals. Any errors are the author’s own.