IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v95y2014i3p636-651.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Support for Repealing Prohibition: An Analysis of State-Wide Referenda on Ratifying the 21st Amendment

Author

Listed:
  • John Dinan
  • Jac C. Heckelman

Abstract

type="main"> The 21st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution repealing national prohibition is the only amendment ratified by state conventions rather than state legislatures. The referenda held to select delegates for these conventions offer a promising source of data for identifying determinants of support for prohibition repeal. We use various proxy measures to determine the importance of economic, political, and demographic forces in motivating support for electing pro-repeal delegate slates to state ratifying conventions. Urbanization, per-capita income, percentage of Catholics, and support for the Democratic Party were correlated with support for prohibition repeal. Neither the percentage of evangelical denominations, gender distribution, nor foreign-born population appeared to significantly influence referenda returns. This study confirms the conventional understanding regarding Catholic opposition to prohibition and higher income areas’ support for repeal. The findings also indicate that congressional backers of repeal were correct in calculating that submitting the 21st Amendment to popularly elected state conventions, rather than rural-dominated state legislatures, would improve the chances of ratification. Moreover, support for repeal among Democratic congressmembers and party leaders appears to have extended to rank-and-file Democratic voters as well.

Suggested Citation

  • John Dinan & Jac C. Heckelman, 2014. "Support for Repealing Prohibition: An Analysis of State-Wide Referenda on Ratifying the 21st Amendment," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(3), pages 636-651, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:95:y:2014:i:3:p:636-651
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/ssqu.12077
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Munger, Michael & Schaller, Thomas, 1997. "The Prohibition-Repeal Amendments: A Natural Experiment in Interest Group Influence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 90(1-4), pages 139-163, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eline Poelmans & John A. Dove & Jason E. Taylor & Ranjit S. Dighe, 2022. "Factors influencing the timing and type of state-level alcohol prohibitions prior to 1920," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 192(3), pages 201-226, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jeremy Horpedahl, 2021. "Bootleggers, Baptists and ballots: coalitions in Arkansas’ alcohol-legalization elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 203-219, July.
    2. Peter T. Leeson & Henry A. Thompson, 2023. "Public choice and public health," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 5-41, April.
    3. Thomas Schaller, 1997. "Consent for Change: Article V and The Constitutional Amendment Process," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 195-213, September.
    4. Koleman S. Strumpf & Felix Oberholzer-Gee, 2002. "Endogenous Policy Decentralization: Testing the Central Tenet of Economic Federalism," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(1), pages 1-36, February.
    5. Dostie, Benoit & Dupré, Ruth, 2012. "“The people's will”: Canadians and the 1898 referendum on alcohol prohibition," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 498-515.
    6. William Keech & Michael Munger, 2015. "The anatomy of government failure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-42, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:95:y:2014:i:3:p:636-651. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.