Researchers continue to disagree over how minority rights fare in direct democracy elections. The authors enter this debate by reviewing previous research and outlining more systematic criteria for assessing minority rights in the context of direct democracy. In applying these criteria, an analysis of direct democracy contests involving gay and lesbian civil rights suggests that minorities are more likely to lose in these contests. The authors suggest that the conclusions of previous researchers may have been premature and that their criteria should be applied to other minority groups.
Bowler, Shaun , and Todd Donovan.2002. Democracy, institutions and attitudes about citizen influence on government . British Journal of Political Science32 (2): 371-91 .
2.
Branton, Regina P.2004. Voting in initiative elections: Does the context of racial and ethnic diversity matter ? State Politics and Policy Quarterly4 (3): 294-317 .
3.
Bull, Chris , and John Gallagher.1996. Perfect enemies: The religious right, the gay movement, and the politics of the 1990s. New York : Crown .
4.
Butler, David , and Austin Ranney.1978. Theory. In Referendums: A comparative study of practice and theory, ed. David Butler and Austin Ranney , 23-37. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute .
5.
DeLeon, Richard E. , and Katherine C. Naff .2004. Identity politics and local political culture: Some comparative results from the Social Capital Benchmark Survey . Urban Affairs Review39 (6): 89-719 .
6.
Donovan, Todd , and Shaun Bowler.1998. Direct democracy and minority rights: An extension . American Journal of Political Science42 (3): 1020-24 .
7.
Donovan, Todd , Jim Wenzel , and Shaun Bowler.2000. Direct democracy and gay rights initiatives after Romer. In The politics of gay rights, ed. Craig A. Rimmerman , Kenneth D. Wald , and Clyde Wilcox , 161-90. Chicago : University of Chicago Press .
8.
Egan, Patrick J. , and Kenneth Sherrill .2005. Neither an in-law nor an outlaw be: Trends in Americans' attitudes toward gay people . Public Opinion Pros, February, http://www.publicopinionpros.com/.
9.
Ellis, Richard J.2002. Democratic delusions: The initiative process in America . Lawrence: University Press of Kansas .
10.
Frey, Bruno S. , and Lorenz Goette.1998. Does the popular vote destroy civil rights?American Journal of Political Science42 (4): 1343-48 .
11.
Gamble, Barbara S.1997. Putting civil rights to a popular vote . American Journal of Political Science41 (1): 245-69 .
12.
Gerber, Elisabeth R.1999. The populist paradox: Interest group influence and the promise of direct legislation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .
13.
Glenmary Research Center.2004. Churches and church membership in the United States, 1960-2000 [Data CD]. Atlanta, GA: Glenmary Research Center .
14.
Haider-Markel, Donald P.2007. Representation and backlash: The positive and negative influence of descriptive representation . Legislative Studies Quarterly32 (1): 107-34 .
15.
Haider-Markel, Donald P. , and Kenneth J. Meier .2003. Legislative victory, electoral uncertainty: Explaining outcomes in the battles over lesbian and gay civil rights . Review of Policy Research20 (4): 671-90 .
16.
Hajnal, Zoltan L. , and Elisabeth R. Gerber .2004. Civil rights. In Principles and practice of American politics, 2nd ed., ed. Samuel Kernell and Steven S. Smith , 121-39. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press .
17.
Hajnal, Zoltan L. , Elisabeth R. Gerber , and Hugh Louch.2002. Minorities and direct legislation: Evidence from California ballot proposition elections . Journal of Politics64 (1): 154-77 .
18.
Lijphart, Arendt.1999. Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press .
19.
Lofton, Katie , and Donald P. Haider-Markel .2007. The politics of same-sex marriage vs. the politics of gay civil rights: A comparison of public opinion and state voting patterns. In The politics of same-sex marriage , ed. Craig Rimmerman and Clyde Wilcox.Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
20.
Madison, James , Alexander Hamilton , and John Jay.1987. The federalist papers. Edited by Isaac Kramnick.London: Penguin .
21.
Nicholson, Stephen P.2005. Voting the agenda: Candidates, elections, and ballot propositions . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .
22.
Riggle, Ellen D. B. , Jerry D. Thomas , and Sharon S. Rostosky .2005. The marriage debate and minority stress . PS: Political Science and Politics38: 221-24 .
23.
Smith, Daniel A. , and Caroline J. Tolbert .2004. Educated by initiative. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press .
24.
Tolbert, Caroline J. , and John A. Grummel .2003. Revisiting the racial threat hypothesis: White voter support for California's Proposition 209 . State Politics & Policy Quarterly3 (2): 183-202 .
25.
Tolbert, Caroline J. , and Rodney E. Hero.1996. Race ethnicity and direct democracy: An analysis of California's illegal immigration initiative . Journal of Politics58 (3): 806-18 .
26.
———. 2001. Dealing with diversity: Racial/ethnic context and social policy change . Political Research Quarterly54 (3): 571-604 .
27.
Tulis, Jeffrey K.2003. The two constitutional presidencies, In The presidency and the political system, 7th ed., ed. MichaelNelson , 79-110. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press .
28.
Voss, D. Stephen , and Penny Miller.2001. Following a false trail: The hunt for white backlash in Kentucky's 1996 desegregation vote . State Politics & Policy Quarterly1 (1): 62-80 .
