The three levels of government in the U.S. federal system maintain a different set of policy priorities because they operate under varying environmental constraints and resources. Efforts to categorize and specify the politics in terms of policy types have been particularly fruitful at both the federal (e.g., Lowi) and the local (e.g., Peterson) levels. At the state level, however, the typology perspective has yet to be more fully developed. This paper makes a preliminary effort to construct a typology framework in understanding state politics and policy. First, politics can be differentiated between growth and redistribution in the structural economic context. While redistributive politics are largely structured by class‐oriented issues, growth politics are predominantly shaped by territorial concerns that temper class and ideological differences. Equally important, the growth‐redistribution distinction can be supplemented by the politics of routine services, such as public education. The latter remains dominated by service‐provider groups. Moreover, based on an empirical analysis of hundreds of bills in one state legislature, these political differences are found to have contributed to variations in policy consensus among lawmakers as well as interest group representation in agenda setting and legitimation across policy arenas. Our findings also suggest limitations to the typology fram