Protest and Congressional Behavior: Assessing Racial and Ethnic Minority Protests in the District

Gillion, Daniel Q.

doi:10.1017/s0022381612000539

Cited by 88 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a consequence, we should not expect governments to pay much attention to demands on issues that the public cares little about (Page and Shapiro 1983) or on which the views of the public are divided or unclear. The scale and intensity of a protest is one signal that governments might use to learn about how much the public cares about an issue, and the consistency with the views of the public at large will signal whether voters are cohesively expressing a clear opinion that might result in an electoral loss if the message is ignored (see Gillion 2012). Therefore, we should only expect governments that face simultaneous large-scale anti-nuclear public debate and protest activity to change their policy in an anti-nuclear direction.…”

Section: How Do Critical Events Affect Policy?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of the Fukushima disaster on nuclear energy debates and policies: a two-step comparative examination

Bernardi

Morales

Lühiste

et al. 2017

Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under what conditions do critical events trigger large-scale public discussion and mobilisation, and can these lead to policy change? In a comparative study of nuclear energy policy after the Japanese Fukushima disaster in March 2011, a theory-development approach is adopted, mobilising data collected from national news agencies' newswires, public surveys, legislation and parliamentary databases, and newspaper editorials in 12 established democracies between March 2011 and March 2013. The analysis suggests two main hypotheses that can guide future research: critical events are more likely to trigger policy change when intense (contentious) mobilisation from policy challengers aligns with the views of the general public, and is backed by major political allies; and critical events are more likely to trigger intense (contentious) mobilisation when policy challengers articulate their opposition around pre-existing policy debates on the issue, and resort to pre-existing organisational and mobilisation resources. Acknowledgements:The research leading to these results has received funding from the European

show abstract

Section: How Do Critical Events Affect Policy?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of the Fukushima disaster on nuclear energy debates and policies: a two-step comparative examination

Bernardi

Morales

Lühiste

et al. 2017

Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, using the NES Senate Election Study from 1988, 1990, and 1992, Bartels () examines why affluent constituents are better represented and concludes that the act of contacting a public official is part of the explanation. Similarly, evidence in recent studies on protest has substantiated the supposition that protest impacts upon policy outcomes (Gillion, ; Htun and Weldon, ).…”

Section: Citizen Participation and Citizen Influencementioning

confidence: 87%

Participation, Online and Otherwise: What's the Difference for Policy Preferences?

Oser

Leighley

Winneg

2014

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. One explanation for why voters' preferences are privileged by policymakers is that voters are likely to communicate their preferences through additional avenues as well. We examine this "communication hypothesis" by comparing the policy preferences of different types of political participators. Methods. We analyze the National Annenberg Election Survey (2008) using latent class analysis to identify different types of political participators and multinomial logistic regression to compare the policy preferences of these participator types. Results. Voters who also engage in additional online and/or offline political acts have policy preferences that differ in a number of meaningful ways from those who "only" vote. Conclusion. The findings indicate that prior research has overlooked important evidence on the connection between citizen participation and political outcomes due to a primary focus on the act of voting. This study suggests how future research can assess the impact of citizens' broader patterns of political participation.As voting rates have remained stable or declined in advanced democracies, scholars of political participation have viewed the increased prevalence of political participation beyond the vote-both offline and online-as an important potential avenue for alternative civic and political engagement. Focusing on the United States, Dalton concluded that even though electoral turnout declined somewhat in the United States over the past several decades, "the repertoire of political action has actually expanded, and people are now engaged in other ways . . . adding to the tools of political activism" (Dalton, 2008:90-94). In addition to the increased prevalence of familiar "old" political activities like petitioning and protesting, various new forms of online * Direct correspondence to Jennifer Oser, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, 3131 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104 oser@post.harvard.edu . Jennifer Oser will share all data and coding for replication purposes. We would like to thank

show abstract

“…There exists a deep literature on the motivations for political protest, spanning both sociology and political science. While the general consensus among scholars holds that citizens view protest as a means of influencing policy outcomes (Gillion 2012;Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995), the more challenging task has been in assessing the efficacy of political protest, particularly as it relates to legislative activity in Congress. 2 That is, do political protests actually influence the legislative behavior of members of Congress?…”

Section: Extant Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Echoing the findings of Burstein (1985), however, Santoro (2002) found that public opinion was primarily responsible for legislation passed after 1964. As Gillion (2012) acknowledges, however, the problem with many of these prior studies is that they view the relationship between protest and legislative activity at the national level, rather than focusing on the individual linkages between protest activities in the various constituencies that legislators represent. Thus, in an innovation over the previous literature, Gillion (2012) analyzed the effect of minority protests at the congressional district level from 1961 to 1995 in a time-series, cross-sectional study.…”

Section: Extant Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, have these demonstrations pushed lawmakers to more aggressively oppose the Trump administration? Previous scholarship has explored the effects of past historical protest movements on legislative behavior, such as the women's movement (Soule et al 1999), the antiwar movement during the Vietnam War (McAdam and Su 2002), and minority protests following the civil rights era (Gillion 2012), often with mixed results. The anti-Trump movement, however, contains substantive differences from these historical analogues that call into question the applicability of past results for explaining these current protests.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Polls and Elections: Resistance Is Not Futile: Anti‐Trump Protest and Senators’ Opposition to President Trump in the 115th Congress

Miras¹

2019

Pres Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Though 2017 saw historic levels of political activism in the form of anti-Trump protests, it remains to be seen whether these demonstrations actually led lawmakers to harden their resistance to President Donald Trump's agenda. Coupling state-level protest data, Senate voting records, and a collection of senators' tweets from 2017, I find that anti-Trump protests led to heightened opposition to the president in the U.S. Senate, though largely along party lines. Senate Democrats representing states that saw more intense Women's March demonstrations were more likely to oppose the president's legislative agenda, particularly on nominations votes. Moreover, the frequency of anti-Trump demonstrations back home increased the likelihood that Democratic senators issued tweets critical of President Trump. Senate Republicans, however, were unresponsive to anti-Trump protests, both in the chamber and on Twitter.

show abstract

Protest and Congressional Behavior: Assessing Racial and Ethnic Minority Protests in the District

Cited by 88 publications

References 39 publications

The effects of the Fukushima disaster on nuclear energy debates and policies: a two-step comparative examination

The effects of the Fukushima disaster on nuclear energy debates and policies: a two-step comparative examination

Participation, Online and Otherwise: What's the Difference for Policy Preferences?

Polls and Elections: Resistance Is Not Futile: Anti‐Trump Protest and Senators’ Opposition to President Trump in the 115th Congress

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About