How are the disadvantaged represented in politics? Using an original survey of 204 advocacy groups in fourteen U.S. states, this research considers how state legislative and lobbying conditions shape interest groups’ representation of disadvantaged identities. Analysis shows that several aspects of state legislative environments affect the diversity of groups’ policy agendas, whereas aggregate measures of lobbying context have surprisingly little effect. These findings have important implications for scholars’ and practitioners’ understanding of the factors motivating advocacy on behalf of the disadvantaged and the broader role that interest organizations play in politics.
AuerbachJudith. 2009. Transforming social structures and environments to help in HIV prevention. Health Affairs28:1655–65.
2.
BaumgartnerFrank R.LeechBeth L.. 2001. Issue niches and policy bandwagons: Patterns of interest group involvement in national politics. Journal of Politics63:1191–213.
3.
BaumgartnerFrank R.BerryJeffreyHojnackiMarieKimballDavidLeechBeth. 2009. Lobbying and policy change: Who wins, who loses, and why. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
BergerMichele Tracy. 2004. Workable sisterhood: The political journey of stigmatized women with HIV/AIDS. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
BerryJeffrey. 1997. The interest group society. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
6.
BerryJeffreyPortneyKentLissmRobinSimoncelliJessicaBergerLisa. 2006. Power and interest groups in city politics. Cambridge, MA: Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
7.
BrowneWilliam P.1990. Organized interests and their issue niches: A search for pluralism in a policy domain. Journal of Politics52:477–509.
8.
CamobrecoJohnBarnelloMichelle. 2003. Postmaterialism and post-industrialism: Cultural influences on female representation in state legislatures. State Politics and Policy Quarterly3:117–38.
9.
CohenCathy J.1999. The boundaries of blackness: AIDS and the breakdown of black politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10.
CrenshawKimberlé. 1991. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review43:1241–99.
11.
DillBonnie Thornton. 1983. Race, class, and gender: Prospects for an all-inclusive sisterhood. Feminist Studies9:131–49.
12.
GrayVirginiaLoweryDavid. 1996a. A niche theory of interest representation. Journal of Politics58:91–111.
13.
GrayVirginiaLoweryDavid. 1996b. The population ecology of interest representation: Lobbying communities in the American states. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
14.
GrayVirginiaLoweryDavid. 2002. State interest group research and the mixed legacy of Belle Zeller. State Politics & Policy Quarterly2:388–410.
15.
VirginiaGrayLoweryDavidFellowesMatthewMcAteeAndrea. 2004. Public opinion, public policy, and organized interests in the American states. Political Research Quarterly57:411–20.
16.
GrayVirginiaLoweryDavidHardenJeffreyCluveriusJohn. 2013. Explaining the anomalous growth of public sector lobbying in the American states, 1997–2007. Publius: The Journal of Federalism4:580–99.
17.
HeaneyMichael T.2004. Issue networks, information, and interest group alliances: The case of Wisconsin welfare politics, 1993–1999. State Politics & Policy Quarterly4:237–70.
18.
HeberligEric S.2005. Getting to know you and getting your vote: Lobbyists’ uncertainty and the contacting of legislators. Political Research Quarterly58:511–20.
19.
HoganRobert. 2001. The influence of state and district conditions on the representation of women in state legislatures. American Politics Research29:4–24.
20.
HojnackiMarie. 1997. Interest groups’ decisions to join alliances or work alone. American Journal of Political Science41:61–87.
21.
HojnackiMarie. 1998. Organized interests’ advocacy behavior in alliances. Political Research Quarterly51:437–59.
22.
HojnackiMarieKimballDavid. 1998. Organized interests and the decision of whom to lobby in congress. American Political Science Review92:775–90.
23.
HojnackiMarieKimballDavid. 1999. The who and how of organizations’ lobbying strategies in committee. Journal of Politics61:999–1024.
24.
HojnackiMarieKimballDavidBaumgartnerFrankBerryJeffreyLeechBeth. 2012. Studying organizational advocacy and influence: Reexamining interest group research. The Annual Review of Political Science15:379–99.
25.
HolyokeThomas. 2003. Choosing battlegrounds: Interest group lobbying across multiple venues. Political Research Quarterly56:325–36.
26.
HolyokeThomas. 2009. Interest group competition and coalition formation. American Journal of Political Science53:360–75.
27.
HolyokeThomasBrownHeathHenigJeffrey R.. 2012. Shopping in the political arena: Strategic state and local venue selection by advocates. State and Local Government Review44:9–20.
28.
HunterKennithWilsonLaura AnnBrunkGregory G.. 1991. Societal complexity and interest-group lobbying in the American states. The Journal of Politics53:488–503.
29.
KaplanMark. 1995. Feminization of the AIDS epidemic. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare2:5–21.
30.
KattlemanKyle. 2015. Legislative professionalism and group concentration: The ESA model revisited. Interest Groups & Advocacy4:165–84.
31.
KurtzSharon. 2002. Workplace justice: Organizing multi-identity movements. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
32.
LoweryDavidGrayVirginia. 2001. The expression of density dependence in state communities of organized interests. American Politics Research29:374–91.
33.
MarchettiKathleen. 2014. Crossing the intersection: The representation of disadvantaged identities in advocacy. Politics, Groups and Identities2:104–19.
34.
MarchettiKathleen. 2015. The use of surveys in interest group research. Interest Groups & Advocacy. doi:10.1057/iga.2015.1.
35.
MeyerDavidImigDouglas. 1993. Political opportunity and the rise and decline of interest group sectors. Social Science Journal30:253–71.
36.
MeyerDavidStaggenborgSusan. 2012. Thinking about strategy. In Strategies for social change, ed. ManeyGregoryKurtz-FlamenbaumRachelRohlingerDeanaGoodwinJeff, 3–22. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
37.
MillerLisa L.2008. The perils of federalism: Poor people and the politics of crime control. New York: Oxford University Press.
38.
MinkoffDebra. 1997. Organizational mobilizations, institutional access, and institutional change. In Women transforming politics, ed. CohenCathyJonesKathyTrontoJoan, 477–98. New York: New York University Press.
39.
NownesAnthonyFreemanPatricia. 1998. Interest group activity in the states. Journal of Politics60:86–112.
40.
PoggioneSarah. 2004. Exploring gender differences in state legislators’ policy preferences. Political Research Quarterly57:305–14.
41.
ReingoldBeth. 2008. Women as officeholders: Linking descriptive and substantive representation. In Political women and American democracy, ed. WolbrechtChristinaBeckwithKarenBaldezLisa, 128–47. New York: Cambridge University Press.
42.
ReingoldBethSmithAdrienne. 2012. Welfare policymaking and intersections of race, ethnicity, and gender in U.S. state legislatures. American Journal of Political Science56:131–47.
43.
SanbonmatsuKira. 2002. Political parties and the recruitment of women to state legislatures. The Journal of Politics64:791–809.
44.
ShorBoris. 2014. July 2014 update: Aggregate data for ideological mapping of American legislatures. Harvard Dataverse Network, V1. Accessed December 1, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/26799, UNF:5: OVOSsr9rJl25lUk4Ck51TA==.
45.
ShorBorisMcCartyNolan. 2011. The ideological mapping of state legislatures. American Political Science Review105:530–51.
46.
Spalter-RothRobertaSchrieberRonnee. 1995. Outsider issues and insider tactics: Strategic tensions in the women’s policy network during the 1980s. In Feminist organizations: Harvest of the new women’s movement, ed. FerreeMyra MarxMartinPatricia Yancey, 105–27. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
47.
SquirePeverill. 2012. The evolution of American legislatures: Colonies, territories and states, 1619–2009. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
48.
StaggenborgSuzanne. 1995. Can feminist organizations be effective? In Feminist organizations: Harvest of the new women’s movement, ed. FerreeMyra MarxMartinPatricia Yancey, 339–55. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
49.
StrolovitchDara. 2007. Affirmative advocacy: Race, class, and gender in interest group politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
50.
SwersMichele. 1998. Are women more likely to vote for women’s issue bills than their male colleagues?Legislative Studies Quarterly23:435–48.
51.
SwersMichele. 2002. The difference women make. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
52.
ThomasSueWelchSusan. 1991. The impact of gender on activities and priorities of state legislators. Western Political Quarterly44:445–56.
53.
TolbertCaroline J.SteuernagelGertrude A.. 2001. Women lawmakers, state mandates and women’s health. Women & Politics22:1–39.
54.
VictorJennifer Nicoll. 2007. Strategic lobbying: Demonstrating how legislative context affects interest groups’ lobbying tactics. American Politics Research35:826–45.
55.
WeldonS. Laurel. 2011. When protest makes policy: How social movements represent disadvantaged groups. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
56.
YoungIris. 2000. Inclusion and democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
