IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v102y2008i03p333-350_08.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Delegating Direct Democracy: Interparty Legislative Competition and the Adoption of the Initiative in the American States

Author

Listed:
  • SMITH, DANIEL A.
  • FRIDKIN, DUSTIN

Abstract

Between 1898 and 1918, voters in 20 American states adopted constitutional amendments granting citizens the power of the initiative. The embrace of direct democracy by voters invites inquiry into why some state legislatures opted to delegate to citizens the power of the initiative, while others did not. Drawing on an original data set, this article uses Event History Analysis hazard models to explain the puzzle of why legislatures might devolve institutional power to citizens. Our longitudinal, macrolevel analysis of socioeconomic and political forces reveals that political considerations—interparty legislative competition, party organizational strength, and third parties—are the most powerful predictors of a legislature's decision to refer the initiative to the ballot. Although several of our findings comport with the conventional wisdom explaining the adoption of the initiative during the Progressive Era, others are surprising, offering us new theoretical insights into why and when legislative bodies might be willing to divest themselves of their institutional power.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, Daniel A. & Fridkin, Dustin, 2008. "Delegating Direct Democracy: Interparty Legislative Competition and the Adoption of the Initiative in the American States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(3), pages 333-350, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:102:y:2008:i:03:p:333-350_08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055408080258/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Manav Raj, 2021. "A house divided: Legislative competition and young firm survival in the United States," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(13), pages 2389-2419, December.
    2. Lorenz Blume & Bernd Hayo & Stefan Voigt, 2015. "Correlates and Determinants of Direct Democracy," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201501, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    3. Yogesh Uppal & Amihai Glazer, 2015. "Legislative Turnover, Fiscal Policy, And Economic Growth: Evidence From U.S. State Legislatures," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 53(1), pages 91-107, January.

    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:cup:apsrev:v:102:y:2008:i:03:p:333-350_08. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.