Suchergebnisse

Educated by Initiative moves beyond previous evaluations of public policy to emphasize the educational importance of the initiative process itself. Since a majority of ballots ultimately fail or get overturned by the courts, Smith and Tolbert suggest that the educational consequences of initiative voting may be more important than the outcomes of the ballots themselves. The result is a fascinating and thoroughly-researched book about how direct democracy teaches citizens about politics, voting, civic engagement and the influence of special interests and political parties. Designed to be accessible to anyone interested in the future of American democracy, the book includes boxes (titled "What Matters") that succinctly summarize the authors' data into easily readable analyses

AbstractObjectivesThis study is one of the first to systematically evaluate the relationship between the Internet and social media use and participation in politics cross‐nationally, in democracies and non‐democracies. Most existing research on this topic analyzes one country or region. We contend that access to globalizing information networks—which exist within digital media space and where discussions of political norms and values are frequent—promotes higher rates of political participation.MethodsUsing multivariate analysis and individual‐level data from the seventh wave of the World Values Survey with representative samples from 45 countries, we employ jackknifed samples to investigate the association between self‐reported frequent Internet and social media use, our proxy for the exposure to globalizing information networks, and political participation.ResultsResults show that more frequent social media use is associated with higher political participation, all else equal. This relationship is significant in democracies and non‐democracies, suggesting that information networks increase political participation even in countries with Internet shutdowns, censorship, and limited rights and freedoms.ConclusionsDespite censorship, propaganda, and misinformation, the Internet and social media may help foster political participation across international borders.

Dissatisfaction with two-party politics is at an all-time high in the US. As extreme polarization and minority rule persist, a possibility of an electoral reform becomes increasingly more likely. This editor's introduction discusses the ranked choice voting (RCV) as an alternative to the current single-member geographic districts with winner-take-all plurality elections in the US. The articles for this thematic issue critically evaluate whether RCV lives up to its promise in improving democracy in the US. Like any rule or institutional change, it has benefits and drawbacks. The empirical and historical research presented here focuses on the implementation and use of RCV in the US compared to other countries. This thematic issue offers new insights into the promise and perils of RCV as a way to aggregate votes in elections that ensure that the winning candidate receives a majority of the votes cast.

Dissatisfaction with two-party politics is at an all-time high in the US. As extreme polarization and minority rule persist, a possibility of an electoral reform becomes increasingly more likely. This editor's introduction discusses the ranked choice voting (RCV) as an alternative to the current single-member geographic districts with winner-take-all plurality elections in the US. The articles for this thematic issue critically evaluate whether RCV lives up to its promise in improving democracy in the US. Like any rule or institutional change, it has benefits and drawbacks. The empirical and historical research presented here focuses on the implementation and use of RCV in the US compared to other countries. This thematic issue offers new insights into the promise and perils of RCV as a way to aggregate votes in elections that ensure that the winning candidate receives a majority of the votes cast.

Despite very different historical and constitutional bases for how we nominate presidential candidates andelect presidentsto office, as well as very different political processes (sequential versus simultaneous voting), both the presidential nominating process and the Electoral College are rooted in state elections, not a national election, and both create state winners and losers. Previous research has not explored the role of state influence or state self-interest in presidential elections. States that voteearlyinthenomination process benefit,asdo battlegroundstatesinthe generalelection,especially small-populationstates.Giventhefundamentallydifferenttypes ofelectionsexaminedinthis paper, it is surprising that very similar forces shape efforts to nationalize presidential elections. Popular reform options of both the nomination process (national primary) and the general election (national popular vote) focus on a single national election in which the nation�s interests, rather than state interests, are paramount. This analysis of 2008 panel survey data shows that citizen opinions on nationalizing presidential elections through a national primary or national popular vote for president are based on strategic decisions defined by short-term electoral politics and long-term self-interest rooted in an individual�s state

Despite very different historical and constitutional bases for how we nominate presidential candidates andelect presidentsto office, as well as very different political processes (sequential versus simultaneous voting), both the presidential nominating process and the Electoral College are rooted in state elections, not a national election, and both create state winners and losers. Previous research has not explored the role of state influence or state self-interest in presidential elections. States that voteearlyinthenomination process benefit,asdo battlegroundstatesinthe generalelection,especially small-populationstates.Giventhefundamentallydifferenttypes ofelectionsexaminedinthis paper, it is surprising that very similar forces shape efforts to nationalize presidential elections. Popular reform options of both the nomination process (national primary) and the general election (national popular vote) focus on a single national election in which the nation�s interests, rather than state interests, are paramount. This analysis of 2008 panel survey data shows that citizen opinions on nationalizing presidential elections through a national primary or national popular vote for president are based on strategic decisions defined by short-term electoral politics and long-term self-interest rooted in an individual�s state

Trust in government has been declining for more than three decades now. E‐government has been proposed as a way to increase citizen trust in government and improve citizen evaluations of government generally. Using two‐stage models to analyze recent Pew survey data, this research explores the relationship between e‐government use, attitudes about e‐government, and trust in government. There is a statistically significant relationship between trust and use of a local government Web site, as well as other positive assessments of federal and local governments. The evidence suggests that e‐government can increase process‐based trust by improving interactions with citizens and perceptions of responsiveness. The findings are theoretically important for reconciling the conflicting research on the effects of e‐government and for understanding variations by level of government. Citizen attitudes toward government, including trust, are core concerns for democratic governance and public administration.

Scholars have begun examining what Progressive reformers called the educative effects of direct democracy, especially the effect ballot initiatives have on voter turnout. Research based on aggregate-level voter age population (VAP) turnout data indicates that ballot measures increase turnout in low-information midterm elections but not in presidential elections. We analyze the impact of ballot initiative use on voter turnout from 1980 through 2002 using voter eligible population (VEP) turnout rates. Cross-sectional time-series analysis reveals that (a) ballot initiatives increase turnout in midterm as well as presidential elections and (b) the turnout effect in midterm and especially presidential elections is considerably larger than previously thought. On average, turnout in presidential elections increases by 0.70% with each initiative on the ballot, whereas turnout in midterm elections increases by 1.7%, all else equal. Given the closeness of the Electoral College contests, it is possible that the mobilizing effects of statewide ballot questions could be the determining factor in future presidential elections.