Using data from 1870 to 2008, the authors attempt to resolve competing claims about the nature of how citizen initiatives affect turnout in the American states. They provide evidence that mobilization is the mechanism through which direct democracy increases turnout. Contrary to previous research, they show that the adoption of the initiative and past usage of the process do not lead to higher turnout in a given election. Citizen initiative campaigns mobilize the electorate in current elections, and the number of competitive initiative elections has a greater effect on turnout than uncompetitive races.
AbramowitzAlan. 2004. Terrorism, gay marriage, and incumbency: Explaining the republican victory in the 2004 election. Forum2:Article 3. http://www.bepress.com/forum/vol2/iss4/art3.
2.
BeckNathaniel. 2001. Time-series–cross-section data: What have we learned in the past few years?Annual Review of Political Science4:271–93.
3.
BlairGus. 1916. Letter from Gus Blair to Thomas J. Walsh. Thomas J. Walsh Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.
4.
BowlerShaunDonovanTodd. 1998. Demanding choices: Opinion, voting, and direct democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
5.
BowlerShaunDonovanTodd. 2002. Democracy, institutions, and attitudes about citizen influence on government. British Journal of Political Science32:371–90.
6.
BowlerShaunDonovanToddHappTrudi. 1992. Ballot propositions and information costs: Direct democracy and the fatigued voter. Western Political Quarterly45:559–68.
7.
BridgesAmyKousserThad. Forthcoming. When do politicians give power to the people? Adoption of the citizen initiative in American states. State Politics & Policy Quarterly.
8.
BurnhamW. DeanClubbJerome M.FlaniganWilliam. 1991. State-level congressional, gubernatorial, and senatorial election data for the United States, 1824–1972[Computer file] (Study No. 75). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. doi:10.3886/ICPSR0007510.3886/ICPSR00075
9.
ChildersMatthewPopkinSamuel L.2007. Has media circus ruined our bread?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
10.
DownsAnthony. 1957. An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
11.
DyckJoshua J.SeabrookNicholas R.2010. Mobilized by direct democracy: Short-term versus long-term effects and the geography of turnout in ballot measure elections. Social Science Quarterly91:188–208.
12.
ErnstHoward R.2001. The historical role of narrow-material interests in initiative politics. In Dangerous democracy: The battle of ballot initiatives in America, ed. SabatoLarry J.LarsonBruce A., 1–25. Oxford, UK: Rowan & Littlefield.
13.
FowlerJames H.BakerLaura A.DawesChristopher T.2008. Genetic variation in political participation. American Political Science Review102:233–48.
14.
FowlerJames H.DawesChristopher T.2008. Two genes predict voter turnout. Journal of Politics70:579–94.
15.
GelmanAndrewHillJennifer. 2006. Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16.
GerberAlan S.GreenDonald P.ShacharRon. 2003. Voting may be habit-forming: Evidence from a randomized field experiment. American Journal of Political Science47:540–50.
17.
GoldsteinKenFreedmanPaul. 2002. Campaign advertising and voter turnout: New evidence for a stimulation effect. Journal of Politics64:721–40.
18.
HeckelmanJac C.1995. The effect of the secret ballot on voter turnout rates. Public Choice82:107–24.
19.
HeroRodney E.TolbertCaroline J.2004. Minority voices and citizen attitudes about government responsiveness in the American states: Do social and institutional context matter?British Journal of Political Science34:109–21.
JacobsonGary C.2004. The politics of congressional elections. 6th ed.New York: Pearson/Longman.
22.
KarpJeffrey A.BanducciSusan A.2000. Going postal: How all-mail elections influence turnout. Political Behavior22:223–39.
23.
KeyV. O.Jr.1949/1984. Southern politics in state and nation. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.
24.
KousserJ. Morgan. 1974. The shaping of southern politics: Suffrage restriction and the establishment of the one-party south, 1880–1910. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25.
KousserThadMullinMegan. 2007. Does voting by mail increase participation? Using matching to analyze a natural experiment. Political Analysis15:428–45.
26.
LupiaArthur. 1994. Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: Information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections. American Political Science Review88:63–76.
27.
MaglebyDavid B.1984. Direct legislation: Voting on ballot propositions in the United States. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
28.
MarcusRobert D.1971. Grand old party: Political structure in the gilded age 1880–1896. New York: Oxford University Press.
NicholsStephen M.1998. State referendum voting, ballot roll-off, and the effect of new electoral technology. State and Local Government Review30:106–17.
34.
NicholsonStephen P.2003. The political environment and ballot proposition awareness. American Journal of Political Science47:403–10.
35.
NicholsonStephen P.2005. Voting the agenda: Candidates, elections, and ballot propositions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36.
PattersonThomas E.2002. The vanishing voter: Public involvement in an age of uncertainty. New York: Knopf.
37.
PopkinSamuel L.1994. The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. 2nd ed.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38.
PutnamRobert D.1995. Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science and Politics28:664–83.
39.
RuskJerrold G.2001. A statistical history of the American electorate. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
40.
SchlozmanDanielYohaiIan. 2008. How initiatives don’t always make citizens: Ballot initiatives in the American states, 1978–2004. Political Behavior30:469–89.
41.
ShadishWilliam R.CookThomas D.CampbellDonald T.2002. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
42.
ShawDaron R.2006. The race to 270: The electoral college and the campaign strategies of 2000 and 2004. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43.
SmithDaniel A.DeSantisMatthewKasselJason. 2006. Same-sex marriage ballot measures and the 2004 presidential election. State and Local Government Review38:78–91.
44.
SmithDaniel A.FridkinDustin. 2008. Delegating direct democracy: Interparty legislative competition and the adoption of the initiative in the American states. American Political Science Review102:333–50.
45.
SmithDaniel A.TolbertCaroline J.2004. Educated by initiative: The effects of direct democracy on citizens and political organizations in the American states. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
46.
SmithMark A.2001. The contingent effects of ballot initiatives and candidate races on turnout. American Journal of Political Science45:700–706.
47.
SundquistJames L.1983. The dynamics of the party system. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
48.
TolbertCaroline J.BowenDaniel C.DonovanTodd. 2009. Initiative campaigns: Direct democracy and voter mobilization. American Politics Research37:155–92.
49.
TolbertCaroline J.GrummelJohn A.SmithDaniel A.2001. The effects of ballot initiatives on voter turnout in the American states. American Politics Research29: 625–48.
50.
TolbertCaroline J.SmithDaniel A.2005. The educative effects of ballot initiatives on voter turnout. American Politics Research33:283–309.
