Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:48:10.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Homeward Bound?: Micro-Level Legislative Responsiveness to Ballot Initiatives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2021

Daniel A. Smith
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent macro-level studies examining the indirect effects of direct legislation on public policy in the American states are decidedly mixed. This study tests whether the macro-level logic of legislative behavior in response to ballot initiatives holds true at the micro-level for individual legislators. I examined the determinants of legislative votes on “counter-majoritarian” legislation—bills that directly challenge the outcomes of earlier statewide ballot initiatives. In 1999, the Colorado state legislature tried to overturn the outcomes of three previous ballot contests. I find that in two of the three cases, a legislator's vote on these bills was related to the vote in his or her district on the respective ballot initiative. This helps explain why many legislators will vote contrary to the outcome of a statewide initiative vote.

Type
Research Article
Information
State Politics & Policy Quarterly , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , Spring 2001 , pp. 50 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association, 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barnett, James. 1915. The Operation of the Initiative, Referendum, and Recall in Oregon. New York: MacMillan Co.Google Scholar
Beard, Charles. 1912. “Introduction.” In Charles Beard and Birl Shultz, Documents on the Statewide Initiative, Referendum, and Recall. New York: MacMillan Co.Google Scholar
Berkman, Michael and O'Connor, Robert. 1993. “Do Women Legislators Matter? Female Legislators and State Abortion Policy.” American Politics Quarterly 21: 102–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowler, Shaun, and Donovan, Todd. 1998. Demanding Choices. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camobreco, John. 1998. “Preferences, Fiscal Policies, and the Initiative Process.” Journal of Politics 60: 819–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, Thomas. 1989. Direct Democracy: The Politics of Initiative, Referendum, and Recall. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, Thomas, and Loevy, Robert. 1993. Colorado Politics and Government. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, Roger. 1969. The Role of the Congressman. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Donovan, Todd, and Bowler, Shaun. 1999. “Direct Democracy and Gay Rights Initiatives after Romer.” In Craig Rimmerman, Kenneth Wald, and Clyde Wilcox, eds., The Politics of Gay Rights. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Donovan, Todd, and Bowler, Shaun. 1998a. “An Overview of Direct Democracy in the American States.” In Shaun Bowler, Todd Donovan, and Caroline Tolbert, eds., Citizens as Legislators. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Donovan, Todd, and Bowler, Shaun. 1998b. “Direct Democracy and Minority Rights: An Extension.” American Journal of Political Science 42: 1020–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donovan, Todd, and Bowler, Shaun. 1998c. “Responsive or Responsible Government?” In Shaun Bowler, Todd Donovan, and Caroline Tolbert, eds., Citizens as Legislators. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Elofson, Stan. 2000. “Initiatives and Referenda in the 1990s—An Update of Their Use.” Issue Brief. Denver: Colorado Legislative Council Staff.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert, Wright, Gerald, and McIver, John. 1993. Statehouse Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fairbank, Rob. 1999. Colorado state representative. Personal interview. March 4.Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard. 1978. Home Style: House Members in Their Districts. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Gamble, Barbara. 1997. “Putting Civil Rights to a Popular Vote.” American Journal of Political Science 91: 245–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Elisabeth. 1996. “Legislative Response to the Threat of Popular Initiatives.” American Journal of Political Science 40: 99–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Elisabeth. 1998. “Pressuring Legislatures through the Use of Initiatives: Two Forms of Indirect Influence.” In Shaun Bowler, Todd Donovan, and Caroline Tolbert, eds., Citizens as Legislators. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Gerber, Elisabeth. 1999. The Populist Paradox: Interest Group Influence and the Promise of Direct Legislation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Haider-Markel, Donald. 1999. “Morality Policy and Individual-level Political Behavior: The Case of Legislative Voting on Lesbian and Gay Issues.” Policy Studies Journal 22: 735–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haider-Markel, Donald, and Meier, Kenneth. 1996. “The Politics of Gay and Lesbian Rights: Expanding the Scope of Conflict.” Journal of Politics 58: 332–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holbrook, Thomas and Dunk, Emily Van. 1993. “Electoral Competition in the American States.” American Political Science Review 87: 955–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kesselheim, Alan. 1999. “Montana: State Senate says voters weren't very smart.” High Country News. 31 (March 15): 6.Google Scholar
Lamborn, Doug. 1999. Colorado state senator. Personal interview. March 2.Google Scholar
Lascher, Edward, Hagen, Michael, and Rochlin, Steven. 1996. “Gun Behind the Door? Ballot Initiatives, State Policies and Public Opinion.” Journal of Politics. 58: 760–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leyba, Gloria. 1999. Colorado state representative. E-mail correspondence. May 18.Google Scholar
Magleby, David. 1984. Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Malbin, Michael, and Benjamin, Gerald. 1992. “Legislatures After Term Limits.” In Michael Malbin and Gerald Benjamin, eds., Limiting Legislative Terms. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Matsusaka, John. 1995. “Fiscal Effects of the Voter Initiative: Evidence from the Last 30 Years.” Journal of Political Economy 103: 587–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, David. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Munro, William, ed. 1912. The Initiative, Referendum, and Recall. New York: Appleton and Co.Google Scholar
Pitkin, Hanna. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press. Rohrlich, 1999. “Calls for Prop. 13 Revisions Gain Momentum,” Los Angeles Times (online edition), March 14.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, Alan. 1998. The Decline of Representative Democracy. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, David. 1989. Citizen Lawmakers: The Ballot Initiative Revolution. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Schrag, Peter. 1998. Paradise Lost: California's Experience, America's Future. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Daniel. 1998. Tax Crusaders and the Politics of Direct Democracy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smith, Daniel, and Herrington, Robert. 2000. “The Process of Direct Democracy: Colorado's 1996 Parental Rights Amendment.” Social Science Journal 37: 179–194.Google Scholar
Stimson, James, MacKuen, Michael, and Erikson, Robert. 1995. “Dynamic Representation.” American Political Science Review 89: 543–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Sue. 1991. “The Impact of Women on State Legislative Policies.” Journal of Politics 53: 958–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Sue, and Welch, Susan. 1991. “The Impact of Gender on Activities and Priorities of State Legislators.” Western Political Quarterly 44: 445–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolbert, Caroline. 1998. “Changing Rules for State Legislatures: Direct Democracy and Governance Policies.” In Shaun Bowler, Todd Donovan, and Caroline Tolbert, eds., Citizens as Legislators. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Tolbert, Caroline, and Hero, Rodney. 1996. “Race/Ethnicity and Direct Democracy: An Analysis of California's Illegal Immigration Initiative.” Journal of Politics 58: 806–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolbert, Caroline, Lowenstein, Daniel, and Donovan, Todd. 1998. “Election Law and Rules for Using Initiatives.” In Shaun Bowler, Todd Donovan, and Caroline Tolbert, eds., Citizens as Legislators. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Delos. 1912. Government by All the People. New York: MacMillan Co. Wlezien, Christopher. 1995. “The Public as Thermostat: Dynamics of Preferences for Spending.” American Journal of Political Science 39: 981–1000.Google Scholar
Zax, Jeffrey. 1989. “Initiatives and Government Expenditures.” Public Choice 63: 267–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar