AshK. (2008). Education in spotlight on statewide ballots. Education Week, 28, 14–15.
2.
BenhabibS. (1996). Toward a deliberative model of democratic legitimacy. In BenhabibS. (Ed.), Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political (pp. 67–94). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
BohmanJ. (2000). The division of labor in democratic discourse: Media, experts, and deliberative democracy. In ChambersS.CostainA. (Eds.), Deliberation, democracy, and the media (pp. 47–64). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
4.
BowlerS.DonovanT. (2000). Demanding choices: Opinion, voting, and direct democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
5.
BradyH.SnidermanP. M. (1985). Attitude attribution: A group basis for political reasoning. American Political Science Review, 79, 1061–1078.
6.
BroderD. S. (2000). Democracy derailed: Initiative campaigns and the power of money. New York, NY: Harcourt.
7.
BurkhalterS.GastilJ.KelshawT. (2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communication Theory, 12, 398–422.
8.
ChaffeeS. H.FrankS. (1996). How Americans get political information: Print versus broadcast news. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546, 48–58.
9.
ChambersS. (2003). Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6, 307–326.
10.
CohenJ. (1997). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In BohmanJ.RehgW. (Eds.), Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics (pp. 67–91). Cambridge: MIT Press.
11.
ConoverP. J.FeldmanS. (1986). Emotional reactions to the economy: I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore. American Journal of Political Science, 30, 50–78.
12.
ContrerasF. (2005). The reconstruction of merit post-Proposition 209. Educational Policy, 19, 371–395.
13.
CornblethC.WaughD. (1995). The great speckled bird: Multicultural politics and education policymaking. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Delli CarpiniM. X.CookF. L.JacobsL. R. (2004). Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 315–344.
16.
DonovanT.BowlerS. (1998). An overview of direct democracy in the American states. In BowlerS.DonovanT.TolbertC. J. (Eds.), Citizens as legislators: Direct democracy in the United States (pp. 1–21). Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.
17.
DonovanT.BowlerS.McCuanD. S. (2001). Political consultants and the initiative industrial complex. In SabatoL. J.ErnstH. R.LarsonB. A. (Eds.), Dangerous democracy? The battle over ballot initiatives in America (pp. 101–134). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
18.
DruckmanJ. N. (1995). Media matter: How newspapers and television news cover campaigns and influence voters. Political Communication, 22, 463–481.
19.
EinsiedelE. F.EastlickD. L. (2000). Consensus conferences as deliberative democracy: A communications perspective. Science Communications, 21, 323–343.
20.
EllisR. J. (2002). Democratic delusions: The initiative process in America. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
21.
EspenshadeT. J.ChungC. (2005). The opportunity cost of admission preference at elite universities. Social Science Quarterly, 86, 293–305.
22.
FayB. (1996). Contemporary philosophy of social science: A multicultural approach. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
23.
FishkinJ. S.LuskinR. C. (2005). Experimenting with a democratic ideal: Deliberative polling and public opinion. Acta Politica, 40, 284–298.
24.
GambleB. S. (1997). Putting civil rights to a popular vote. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 245–269.
25.
GastilJ. (2008). Political communication and deliberation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
GastilJ.LevineP. (Eds.). (2005). The deliberative democracy handbook: Strategies for effective civic engagement in the 21st century. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
27.
GerberE. R. (1996). Legislative response to the threat of popular initiatives. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 99–128.
28.
GerberE. R. (1999). The populist paradox: Interest group influence and the promise of direct legislation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
GerberE. R.LupiaA.McCubbinsM. D.KiewietD. R. (2001). Stealing the initiative: How state government responds to direct democracy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
30.
GoodinR. (2003). Reflective democracy. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
31.
GraberD. A. (Ed.). (1994). Media power in politics (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
32.
Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003).
33.
Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003).
34.
GuetzloeD. M. (2001). Initiative politics: A useful blend of vested interests and citizen politics. In SabatoL. J.ErnstH. R.LarsonB. A. (Eds.), Dangerous democracy? The battle over ballot initiatives in America (pp. 30–32). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
35.
GuinierL. (1994). The tyranny of the majority: Fundamental fairness in representative democracy. New York, NY: Free Press.
36.
GuinierL. (2008). Beyond electocracy: Rethinking the political representative as powerful stranger. The Modern Law Review, 71, 1–35.
GutmannA.ThompsonD. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
40.
GutmannA.ThompsonD. (2004). Why deliberative democracy?Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41.
HajnalZ.GerberE.LouchH. (2002). Minorities and direct legislation: Evidence from California ballot proposition elections. Journal of Politics, 64, 154–177.
KidderW. C. (2005). The struggle for access fromSweatt to Grutter: A history of African American, Latino, and American Indian law school admissions, 1950-2000. Harvard Black Letter Law Journal, 19. Retrieved from http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/blj/vol19/kidder.pdf
44.
KincheloeJ. L.SteinbergS. R. (2001). Changing multiculturalism. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
45.
KymlickaW. (1995). Community. In GoodinR. E.PettitP. (Eds.), A companion to contemporary political philosophy (pp. 366–378). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
46.
LascherE.HagenM.RochlinS. (1996). Gun behind the door? Ballot initiatives, state polices, and public opinion. Journal of Politics, 58, 760–775.
47.
LupiaA. (1994). Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: Information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections. American Political Science Review, 88, 63–76.
48.
LupiaA.McCubbinsM. D. (1998). The democratic dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know?New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
49.
MacedoS. (1999). Introduction. In MacedoS. (Ed.), Deliberative politics: Essays on Democracy and disagreement (pp. 3–14). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
50.
MacedoS. (2005). Democracy at risk: How political choices undermine citizen participation, and what we can do about it. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
MaglebyD. B. (1989). Opinion formation and opinion change in ballot proposition campaigns. In MargolisM.MauserG. A. (Eds.), Manipulating public opinion: Essays on public opinion as a dependent variable (pp. 95–115). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
54.
MaglebyD. B. (1995). Let the voters decide? An assessment of the initiative and referendum process. University of Colorado Law Review, 70, 13–46.
55.
MatsusakaJ. G. (2004). For the many or the few: The initiative, public policy, and American democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
56.
McDonnellL. (2004). Politics, persuasion, and educational testing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
57.
MosesM. S. (2002). Embracing race: Why we need race-conscious education policy. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
58.
MosesM. S. (2004). Contested ideals: Understanding moral disagreements over education policy. Journal of Social Philosophy, 35, 471–482.
59.
MosesM. S. (2010). By the people, for the people: Interrogating the education-policy-by-ballot-initiative phenomenon. In KerdemanD. (Ed.), Philosophy of education 2009 (pp. 177–186). Urbana, IL: Philosophy of Education Society.
60.
MosesM. S.FarleyA. N. (2011). Are ballot initiatives a good way to make education policy? The case of affirmative action. Educational Studies, 47, 260–279.
61.
MosesM. S.FarleyA. N.GaertnerM.PaguyoC.JacksonD. D.HoweK. R. (2010). Investigating the defeat of Amendment 46 in Colorado: An analysis of the trends and principal factors influencing voter behaviors. New York, NY: Public Interest Projects.
62.
MosesM. S.FarleyA. N.SaenzL. P. (2010, May). Community dialogue and voter views on affirmative action: Using researcher expertise for the public good. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Denver, CO.
63.
MosesM. S.SaenzL. P. (2008). Hijacking education policy decisions: The case of affirmative action. Harvard Educational Review, 78, 289–310.
64.
MosesM. S.YunJ. T.MarinP. (2009). Affirmative action’s fate: Are 20 more years enough?Education Policy Analysis Archives, 17. Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v17n17/
65.
MurdochI. (1970). The sovereignty of good. London, England: Routledge.
66.
PitkinH. (1971). The concept of representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
67.
Pew Research Center (with R. Edmonds). (2004). The state of the news media 2004: An annual report on American journalism. Retrieved from http://stateofthemedia.org/2004/
68.
RawlsJ. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
69.
RobertsG.KlibanoffH. (2006). The race beat: The press, the civil rights struggle, and the awakening of a nation. New York, NY: Knopf.
70.
SabatoL. J.ErnstH. R.LarsonB. A. (2001). A call for change: Making the best of initiative politics. In SabatoL. J.ErnstH. R.LarsonB. A. (Eds.), Dangerous democracy? The battle over ballot initiatives in America (pp. 179–189). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
SaenzL. P. (2010). Education policy by ballot box: Examining the impact of anti-affirmative action initiatives (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Colorado at Boulder.
73.
SchmidtD. (1989). Citizen lawmakers: The ballot initiative revolution. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
74.
SchoemD.HurtadoS.SevigT.CheslerM.SumidaS. H. (2001). Intergroup dialogue: Democracy at work in theory and practice. In SchoemD.HurtadoS. (Eds.), Intergroup dialogue: Deliberative democracy in school, college, community, and workplace (pp. 1–21). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
SmithD. A.TolbertC. (2004). Educated by initiative: The effects of direct democracy on citizens and political organizations in the American states. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
77.
SmithG.WalesC. (2000). Citizens’ juries and deliberative democracy. Political Studies, 48, 51–65.
78.
SmithM. (2002). Ballot initiatives and the democratic citizen. Journal of Politics, 64, 892–903.
79.
StratmanT. (2005). The effectiveness of money in ballot measure campaigns. California Law Review, 78, 1041–1064.
80.
TolbertC.GrummelJ.SmithD. (2001). The effects of ballot initiatives on voter turnout in the American states. American Politics Research, 29, 625–648.
81.
WachbroitR. (1998). Public deliberation and scientific expertise. Report From the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy, 18(4), 17–23.
82.
YoungI. M. (1996). Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In BenhabibS. (Ed.), Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political (pp. 120–135). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
83.
YoungI. M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
84.
ZúñigaX.NagdaB. A.CheslerM.Cytron-WalkerA. (2007). Intergroup dialogue in higher education: Meaningful learning about social justice. ASHE Higher Education Report, 32(4), 1–128.