Legislative Victory, Electoral Uncertainty: Explaining Outcomes in the Battles over Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights |
| |
| Authors: | DONALD P HAIDER-MARKEL KENNETH J MEIER |
| |
| Institution: | Donald P. Haider-Markel is Associate Professor of political science and Director of the Survey Research Center of the Policy Research Institute at the University of Kansas. His research and teaching is focused on public policy, public opinion, and political participation. He has authored and coauthored several articles, book chapters, and a book in a range of issue areas, including the environment, gay politics, gun control, abortion, hate crimes, and citizen militia groups. He has been recipient or corecipient of grants from the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, and the American Psychological Foundation.;Kenneth J. Meier is the Charles Puryear Professor of Liberal Arts in the Department of Political Science and the Sara Lindsey Chair in Government in the George Bush School at Texas A&M University. He is interested in questions of management and governance in a wide range of policy areas. |
| |
| Abstract: | Previous studies indicate that in cases of relatively low issue salience, the interest group model best explains lesbian and gay antidiscrimination policy in the American states. The analysis of state and local public policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation concludes that for cases of high issue salience, the morality politics model best describes outcomes. The interest group politics model is used here in a case study of Wisconsin's passage of a comprehensive antidiscrimination policy, while the morality politics model is used to investigate the electoral outcomes of anti‐gay ballot initiatives in several states. The results of this analysis conform with prior research—when lesbian and gay issues are not salient, the interest group politics model best explains resulting policy, however, under salient conditions, the morality politics model best describes outcomes. Finally, the implications of this research for social scientists and activists are discussed. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
