Direct Democracy and Organized Interests: Examining the Existence of a Participation Gap among Groups

Authors

  • Robert Alexander

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2007.27.0.345-365

Abstract

Scholars have devoted increased attention to the role of interest groups in direct democracy campaigns over the past few years. This study seeks to add to this literature by analyzing data drawn from a mail survey of over 400 organized interests in three states. In particular, I examine how and to what extent organized interests utilize tools of direct democracy. Among sample groups, I find that (1) Most groups do something relative to direct democracy; (2) Group activity varies significantly across states; (3) A group’s overall activity varies considerably relative to their involvement with direct democracy; and (4) Little support exists supporting the notion that economic or business groups are more apt to participate in direct democracy than are other types of groups. In short, I find little evidence of a participation gap among different types of groups in the states relative to the practice of direct democracy. The variation in participation that does occur appears to be most closely related to a group’s age and the existence of a PAC.

References

Baumgartner, Frank, and Beth Leech. 1998. Basic Interests: The Importance of Groups in Politics and in Political Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781400822485

Boehmke, Frederick. 2002. The Effect of Direct Democracy on the Size and Diversity of State Interest Group Populations. Journal of Politics 64:827-844. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00148

Boehmke, Frederick. 2005. The Indirect Effect of Direct Legislation: How Institutions Shape Interest Group Systems. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

Bowler, Shaun, and Todd Donovan. 1998. Demanding Choices: Opinion and Voting in Direct Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/mpub.15428

Bowler, Shaun, and Todd Donovan. 2002. Democracy, Institutions and Attitudes about Citizen Influence on Government. British Journal of Political Science 32:371-390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123402000157

Bowler, Shaun, Todd Donovan, and Caroline Tolbert. 1998. Citizens as Legislators: Direct Democracy in the United States. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

Broder, David. 2000. Democracy Derailed: Initiative Campaigns and the Power of Money. New York: Harcourt Press.

Cigler, Allan, and Burdette Loomis. 1995. Interest Group Politics, 4th ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

Ernst, Howard. 2002. The Historical Role of Narrow-Material Interests in Initiative Politics. In Dangerous Democracy?: The Battle over Ballot Initiatives in America. New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

Ellis, Richard. 2002. Democratic Delusions: The Initiative Process in America. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

Gerber, Elisabeth R. 1996. Legislative Response to the Threat of Popular Initiatives. American Journal of Political Science 40:99-128. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111696

Gerber, Elisabeth R. 1999. The Populist Paradox: Interest Group Influence and the Promise of Direct Legislation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Kollman, Ken. 1998. Outside Lobbying: Public Opinion and Interest Group Strategies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Magelby, David. 1984. Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Manweller, Matthew. 2005. Coalition Building in Direct Democracy Campaigns. American Politics Research 33:246-282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X04272429

Nownes, Anthony, and Patricia Freeman. 1998. Interest Group Activity in the States. Journal of Politics 93:86-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2648002

Schlozman, Kay, and John Tierney. 1986. More of the Same: Washington Pressure Group Activity in a Decade of Change. Journal of Politics 45:351-375. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130130

Schrag, Peter. 1998. Paradise Lost: California's Experience, America's Future. New York: The New Press.

Smith, Daniel, and Caroline Tolbert. 2001. The Initiative to Party: Partisanship and Ballot Initiatives in California. Party Politics 7:739-757. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354068801007006004

Stratmann, Thomas. 2006. Is Spending More Potent For or Against a Proposition? Evidence from Ballot Measures. American Journal of Political Science 50:788-801. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00216.x

Tolbert, Caroline, John Grummel, and Daniel Smith. 2001. The Effects of Ballot Initiatives on Voter Turnout in the American States. American Politics Research 29:625-648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X01029006005

Downloads

Published

2007-01-01

Issue

Section

Articles