Direct Democracy and Organized Interests: Examining the Existence of a Participation Gap among Groups
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2007.27.0.345-365Abstract
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
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
