The Effects of Ballot Initiatives on Voter Turnout in the American States

Tolbert, Caroline J.; Grummel, John A.; Smith, Daniel A.

doi:10.1177/1532673x01029006005

Cited by 151 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research examining the impact of direct democracy on citizen participation over the past twenty-five years finds that states with frequent use of ballot initiatives have higher voter turnout rates. 25 Because voters can directly adopt policy, one might expect that citizens living in initiative states should perceive government as more responsive; thus, a potential consequence of direct democracy concerns political efficacy. But there is little empirical research addressing the question of initiatives and citizen attitudes towards government, particularly regarding efficacy, in the United States.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Minority Voices and Citizen Attitudes about Government Responsiveness in the American States: Do Social and Institutional Context Matter?

Hero

Tolbert

2003

Brit. J. Polit. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has shown that institutional factors, particularly ‘direct democracy’, along with racial context, shape policy outcomes in the fifty American states. But less is understood about the impact of such factors on attitudes towards government of racial and ethnic minorities. The passage of ballot initiatives targeting minority interests might be expected to have a negative effect on these groups. This study considers the impact of institutional and social context on attitudes about government responsiveness (external efficacy), drawing on pooled NES survey data from 1988–98 merged with state level data. Consistent with previous research, which was based on a single year, there is strong evidence that citizens in states with frequent exposure to direct democracy are more likely to perceive that government is responsive to their needs. At the same time, direct democracy did not have the hypothesized detrimental impact on racial and ethnic group attitudes towards government in general. State racial context also did not have a measurable impact on individual-level attitudes. Regardless of state environmental contexts, however, racial and ethnic minorities (with the exception of Latinos) reported less confidence in government than whites. The findings have broader implications, particularly given the growing racial and ethnic diversity and the ongoing politics of democratic inclusion in America.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Minority Voices and Citizen Attitudes about Government Responsiveness in the American States: Do Social and Institutional Context Matter?

Hero

Tolbert

2003

Brit. J. Polit. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given that we do not account for the salience of initiatives, but rather only whether the state allows for initiatives, this likely creates a bias against obtaining significant results. Furthermore, Tolbert, Grummel, and Smith (2001) find that the presence of initiatives alone is associated with an increase in state-level turnout for national offices, which could further decrease the likelihood that we would find significant results, given the construction of our dependent variables. It is worth noting also that other studies have demonstrated that the presence of an initiative (e.g., Boehmke 2005; Gerber 1999) can have indirect effects on political actions and outcomes.…”

Section: Additional Testsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Separation of Powers and Turnout

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Early research in the US context has only found scant evidence that the presence of direct democratic procedures in US states boosts election turnout [10,11]. More recent research, however, indicates that direct democracy might indeed have a positive effect on election turnout [12,13]. This mobilizing effect in the US is stronger for mid-term elections than for presidential elections [14].…”

Section: Direct Democracy and Voter Mobilizationmentioning

confidence: 96%

Sow the Wind, Reap the Whirlwind? Mobilization Cascades in Direct Democratic Initiatives.

Kovic

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the possibility of mobilization cascades in direct democratic popular initiatives. A mobilization cascade is a salience-based mobilizing effect whereby one popular initiative has a positive mobilizing effect on a subsequent popular initiative that deals with with a similar policy issue. The existence of a mobilization cascade would imply that voters develop salience for and positive attitudes towards policy issues merely through directdemocratic exposure to those policy issues in the recent past. In order to explore the mobilization cascade, I analyze three popular initiative pairs from Switzerland from the years 2012, 2013 and 2014. In each year, two initiatives dealt with similar policy issues, and the second initiative in each pair was making more far-reaching demands. The results suggest that a mobilization cascade might exist, but that it is probably a weak effect.

show abstract

The Effects of Ballot Initiatives on Voter Turnout in the American States

Cited by 151 publications

References 29 publications

Minority Voices and Citizen Attitudes about Government Responsiveness in the American States: Do Social and Institutional Context Matter?

Minority Voices and Citizen Attitudes about Government Responsiveness in the American States: Do Social and Institutional Context Matter?

Separation of Powers and Turnout

Sow the Wind, Reap the Whirlwind? Mobilization Cascades in Direct Democratic Initiatives.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About