No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Politics of Marriage Equality: Confrontational Interest Groups and Nonconfrontational Officeholders
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 July 2020
Abstract
The passage of marriage equality in Rhode Island offers insight into the role of organized groups and politicians in policymaking. Despite a Democratic legislature and popular support, marriage equality was initially defeated in 2011, in part due to concentrated opposition from the Catholic Church and the reluctance of Democratic officeholders to confront members of the same party on the issue. In the following primary elections, small interest groups in Rhode Island, with the help of national interest groups, helped raise the salience of marriage equality by campaigning against opponents, resulting in the release of a marriage equality bill from the Senate Judiciary Committee and its subsequent passage in a floor vote. One organized interest was responsible for blocking marriage equality in the legislature’s most significant bottleneck and different organized interests were responsible for enabling passage. The passage of marriage equality in Rhode Island shows that interest groups can enable as well as obstruct majority opinion.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association
Footnotes
He would like to thank Shawn Patterson and John Zaller for inspiring this research and three anonymous reviewers for providing feedback at different stages. The William Steiger Fellowship provided funding to help finish this manuscript. Most of all, he thanks all of the interview subjects who took considerable time out of their schedules to meet with him and to answer questions thoughtfully.
References
Barclay, Scott, and Fisher, Shauna. 2003. “The States and the Differing Impetus for Divergent Paths on Same-Sex Marriage, 1990–2001.” Policy Studies Journal 31(3): 331–52.10.1111/1541-0072.00025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bawn, Kathleen, Cohen, Marty, Karol, David, Masket, Seth, Noel, Hans, and Zaller, John. 2011. “A Theory of Parties: Groups, Policy Demands and Nominations in American Politics.” Perspectives on Politics 10(3): 571–97.10.1017/S1537592712001624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baylor, Christopher. 2017. First to the Party: The Group Origins of Political Transformation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.10.9783/9780812294514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, Karlyn, O’Neil, Eleanor, and Sims, Heather. 2015. “Public Opinion on Same-Sex Marriage: Anatomy of a Change,” American Enterprise Institute Paper and Studies, June.Google Scholar
Cammisa, Ann Marie. 2006. “Massachusetts Political and Religious Culture." Cleary, Edward, and Hertzke, Allen D., eds. Representing God at the Statehouse. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward, and Stimson, James. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691218250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coelho, Courtney. 2013. “Poll: Rhode Island Supports Same Sex Marriage,” News from Brown. February 28.Google Scholar
Cohen, Marty, Karol, David, Noel, Hans, and Zaller, John. 2008. The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations Before and After Reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226112381.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Considine, Austin. 2011. “For Catholics, Open Attitude Toward Gay/Lesbian Issues.” New York Times, April 22.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1993. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Oakland: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and McCubbins, Mathew D. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the US House of Representatives. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desmond, Joan Frawley. 2013. “Bishop Thomas Tobin: Why I Switched to the Republican Party.” National Catholic Register, August 22.Google Scholar
Gregg, Katherine, Edgar, Randal, and Marcelo, Philip. 2013. “Political Scene, Candid-Camera Episode for Raimondo.” Providence Journal, April 29.Google Scholar
Gregg, Katherine, Marcelo, Philip, and, Randal Edgar. 2011. “Same-Sex Marriage Dead.” Providence Journal, April 28.Google Scholar
Haider-Markel, Donald. 2010. Out and Runnings: Gay and Lesbian Candidates, Elections, and Policy Representation. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Haider-Markel, Donald, Joslyn, Mark, and Kniss, Chad. 2000. “Minority Group Interests and Political Representation: Gay Elected Officials in the Policy Process.” Journal of Politics 62(2): 568–77.10.1111/0022-3816.00026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heaney, Michael. 2004. “Issue Networks, Information, and Interest Group Alliances: The case of Wisconsin Welfare Politics, 1993–1999.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 4(3): 237–77.10.1177/153244000400400301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hertel-Fernandez, Alexander. 2019. State Capture: How Conservative Activists, Big Businesses, and Wealthy Donors Reshaped the American States⸺and the Nation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, Tom. 2013. “Gay Marriage Popular but Chafee Not.” (https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/polls/gay-marriage-popular-but-chafee-not/).Google Scholar
Karol, David, and Thurston, Chloe. 2020. “From Personal to Partisan: Abortion, Party, and Religion Among California State Legislators.” Studies in American Political Development. (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X19000166).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith. 1998. A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Krupat, Kitty, and McCreery, Patrick, eds. 2001. Out at Work: Building a Gay-Labor Alliance. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, Gregory, and Galope, Reynold. 2014. “Support for Gay and Lesbian Rights: How and Why the South Differs from the Rest of the Country.” PMAP Publications 10. (https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/pmap_facpubs/10).Google Scholar
Lewis, Gregory, and Gossett, Charles. 2008. “Changing Public Opinion on Same-Sex Marriage: The Case of California.” Politics and Policy 36(1): 4–30.10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, Gregory, and Rogers, Marc. 1999. “Does the Public Support Equal Employment Rights for Gays and Lesbians?” In Gays and Lesbians in the Democratic Process: Public Policy, Public Opinion, and Democratic Representation, ed. Riggle, Ellen and Tadlock, Barry. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, Gregory, and Oh, Seong Soo. 2008. “Public Opinion and State Action on Same-Sex Marriage." State and Local Government Review 40(1): 42–53.10.1177/0160323X0804000104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahoney, James, Kimball, Erin, and Koivu, Kendra L.. 2009. “The Logic of Historical Explanation in the Social Sciences.” Comparative Political Studies 42(1): 114–46.10.1177/0010414008325433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nugent, Amelia. 2013. “Rhode Island Faith Community Speaks Out for Marriage Equality.” Rainbow Times, April 8.Google Scholar
Rimmerman, Craig. 2002. From Identity to Politics: The Lesbian and Gay Movement in the United States. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Seelye, Katharine Q. 2013. “The Last Holdout in New England, Rhode Island Weights Gay Marriage." New York Times, January 23.Google Scholar
Stanton, Mike. 2013. “Combative R.I. Bishop Counters Pope Francis’s Message.” Boston Globe, December 10.Google Scholar
Wareham, Hannah Clay. 2010. “Poll: Rhode Island voters support same-sex marriage." Bay Windows, August 18.Google Scholar