Attempts to assess the influence of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) groups on LGBT-related policy are hampered by imprecise measurement of LGBT group strength and activity. This research note examines the problems with existing measures of state-level LGBT advocacy strength and it develops an alternative measure of LGBT advocacy group strength. We utilize revenue and asset data available from the National Center for Charitable Statistics to develop better and reproducible state-level measures of LGBT interest group strength on an annual basis. We compare our measures to existing measures and demonstrate their utility for the ongoing study of LGBT politics. The approach used in construction of our measure can be extended over time, is replicable in other issue areas, and thus has broad utility for the study of interest groups at the subnational level.
AllenMahalleyPettusCarrieHaider-MarkelDonald P.2004. “Making the National Local: Specifying the Conditions for National Government Influence on State Policymaking.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly4 (3): 318–44.
BarclayScottFisherShauna. 2003. “The States and the Differing Impetus for Divergent Paths on Same-Sex Marriage, 1990-2001.” Policy Studies Journal31 (3): 331–52. doi:10.1111/1541-0072.00025.
4.
BarmanEmily. 2013. “Classification Struggles in the Nonprofit Sector: The Formation of the National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities, 1969–1987.” Social Science History37 (1): 103–41.
5.
BerryWilliamRingquistEvanFordingRichardHansonRussell. 1998. “Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the American States, 1960-93.” American Journal of Political Science42 (1): 327–48.
6.
Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2018. “SA1 Personal Income Summary: Personal Income, Population, per Capita Personal Income.” https://www.bea.gov/iTable/index_regional.cfm (accessed January 29, 2018).
EriksonRobert S.WrightGerald C.McIverJohn P.1993. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haider-MarkelDonald P. 1997. “Interest Group Survival: Shared Interests versus Competition for Resources.” Journal of Politics59 (3): 903–12.
13.
Haider-MarkelDonald P.2001. “Policy Diffusion as a Geographical Expansion of the Scope of Political Conflict: Same-Sex Marriage Bans in the 1990s.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly1 (1): 5–26.
14.
Haider-MarkelDonald P.2010. Out and Running: Gay and Lesbian Candidates, Elections, and Policy Representation. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
15.
Haider-MarkelDonald P.MeierKenneth J.1996. “The Politics of Gay and Lesbian Rights: Expanding the Scope of the Conflict.” Journal of Politics58 (2): 332–49. doi:10.2307/2960229.
16.
Haider-MarkelDonald P.MeierKenneth J.2003. “Legislative Victory, Electoral Uncertainty: Explaining Outcomes in the Battles over Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights.” Review of Policy Research20 (4): 671–90.
17.
HansenJohn M.1985. “The Political Economy of Group Membership.” The American Political Science Review79 (1): 79–96.
KaneMelinda D.2003. “Social Movement Policy Success: Decriminalizing State Sodomy Laws, 1969-1998.” Mobilization8 (3): 313–34.
20.
KarchAndrewNicholson-CrottySean C.WoodsNeal D.BowmanAnn O’M.2016. “Policy Diffusion and the Pro-innovation Bias.” Political Research Quarterly69 (1): 83–95.
21.
LaxJeffreyPhillipsJustin. 2009. “Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness.” American Political Science Review103 (3): 367–86.
22.
LewisDaniel C.2011. “Direct Democracy and Minority Rights: Same-Sex Marriage Bans in the U.S. States.” Social Science Quarterly92 (2): 364–83.
23.
LewisDaniel C.JacobsmeierMatthew L.2017. “Evaluating Policy Representation with Dynamic MRP Estimates: Direct Democracy and Same-Sex Relationship Policies in the United States.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly17 (4): 441–64.
24.
LoomisBurdettCiglerAllan. 2007. “Introduction: The Changing Nature of Interest Group Politics.” In Interest Group Politics, eds. CiglerAllanLoomisBurdett, 7th ed.Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1–33.
25.
MintromMichaelVergariSandra. 1998. “Policy Networks and Innovation Diffusion: The Case of State Education Reforms.” The Journal of Politics60 (1): 126–48.
O’ConnellMartinFelizSarah. 2011. “Same-Sex Couple Household Statistics from the 2010 Census.” Fertility and Family Statistics Branch, Social, Economic and Housing Statistics Division U.S. Bureau of the Census. https://www.census.gov/library/working-papers/2011/demo/SEHSD-WP2011-26.html (accessed March 21, 2014).
OlsonMancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
33.
PachecoJulianna. 2017. “Free-Riders or Competitive Races? Strategic Interaction across the American States on Tobacco Policy Making.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly17 (3): 299–318.
TaylorJamiLewisDanielJacobsmeierMatthewDiSarroBrian. 2012. “Content and Complexity in Policy Reinvention and Diffusion: Gay and Transgender-Inclusive Laws against Discrimination.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly12 (1): 75–98. doi:10.1177/1532440011433589.
WaldKennethButtonJamesRienzoBarbara. 1996. “The Politics of Gay Rights in American Communities: Explaining Antidiscrimination Ordinances and Policies.” American Journal of Political Science40 (4): 1152–78. doi:10.2307/2111746.
43.
WalkerJack. 1983. “The Origins and Maintenance of Interest Groups in America.” American Political Science Review77 (2): 390–406.
44.
WrightJohn. 2003. Interest Groups and Congress: Lobbying, Contributions and Influence. New York: Longman.
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.
