457 research outputs found

    Campaigns for ballot initiatives on minority rights may increase animosity towards these groups

    Get PDF
    The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments for Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action and will soon decide whether Michigan’s 2006 ballot initiative to end affirmative action policies at state universities violated the Equal Protection Clause. Using survey data taken before and after campaigns to pass “Defense of Marriage Amendments” in 2004, Todd Donovan shows that the actual promotion of these referendums can serve to negatively define and stigmatize the relevant minority group, highlighting a major concern with putting minority rights to a popular vote

    Voters are not blindly cynical about money in politics

    Get PDF
    Recent years have seen growing concern over the role of money in politics, with many Americans seemingly believing that campaign money represents quid pro quo corruption. But in new research which uses survey experiments, Todd Donovan finds that people think about campaign money is based on both its source and the amount; Democrats and Republicans see donations to their own party as honest, and to the other, as dishonest. They also found that when money is seen to be spent on negative campaign ads, respondents were more likely to view it as corrupt compared to spending on ads in general

    Ranked choice voting in the US is contested but not confusing

    Get PDF
    In addition to the candidates vying for re-election in November, ranked choice voting (RCV) referendums will also be on the ballot in many states, cities, and counties. Todd Donovan looks at the recent history of RCV in the US, and highlights that partisan divisions are not a consistent feature in support or opposition. While some opponents have argued that RCV is confusing, he writes that evidence from New York City’s 2021 mayoral primary election and other contests show that there is a high level of understanding among voters

    The Top Two Primary: What Can California Learn from Washington?

    Get PDF

    Direct Democracy and Campaigns Against Minorities

    Get PDF

    A Goal for Reform: Make Elections Worth Stealing

    Get PDF

    Democracy, Institutions and Attitudes about Citizen Influence on Government

    Get PDF
    Theorists such as Carole Pateman and Benjamin Barber suggest that democratic participation will engage citizens and lead them to have more positive regard for political processes and democratic practices. The American states provide a setting where provisions for direct voter participation in legislation vary substantially. If participatory institutions have an \u27educative role\u27 that shapes perceptions of government, then citizens exposed to direct democracy may be more likely to claim they understand politics and be more likely to perceive that they are capable of participation. They may also be more likely to perceive that government is responsive to them. We merge data on state-level political institutions with data from the 1992 American National Election Study to test these hypotheses with OLS models. Our primary hypotheses find support. We present evidence that the effects of exposure to direct democracy on internal and external political efficacy rival the effects of formal education

    Reasoning about Institutional Change: Winners, Losers and Support for Electoral Reforms

    Get PDF
    This study assesses how the mass public reasons about political institutions by examining the effects of winning and losing on support for several electoral reform proposals. The national sample survey identified majorities supporting proposals for major changes in America\u27s electoral institutions, and that suggested electoral losses may have a modest effect in reducing losers\u27 satisfaction with how democracy works. Random assignment experiments that tested hypotheses derived from theories of risk perception were conducted. It was found that people who saw themselves as winners and losers in the electoral arena reasoned differently when proposals for change were framed in terms of loss. Losers may be just slightly more supportive than winners of some electoral reforms; however, they appeared less sensitive than winners to framing effects that presented reform proposals in terms of the risks of loss. Winners may support the same reform proposals but their support for change decreased more when the proposals were framed as a potential loss. Winners are thus risk aversive when evaluating electoral reform proposals, while losers may even be risk seeking. Although this survey found support for major reforms, the patterns of reasoning that were identified in the mass public suggest a basis for the stability of electoral institutions
    • …
    corecore