Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T21:09:59.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Minority Protest and the Early Stages of Governmental Responsiveness in the Electoral Process

from Part I - Anxieties of Power, Influence, and Representation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2019

By
Daniel Gillion  and
Patricia Posey
Edited by
Frances E. Lee  and
Nolan McCarty
Frances E. Lee
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Nolan McCarty
Affiliation:
Princeton University, New Jersey
Get access

Summary

Does minority political protest lead to governmental responsiveness? Although minority protest has played a large role in conveying minority grievances to government since the civil rights era, little is known of how marginalized voices navigate a majoritarian political system to influence the behavior of political officials. Using protest data that spans across several decades into a post–civil rights era, we show that minority protests have a large effect on the early stages of governmental responsiveness, but the influence of minority protest actions are heavily linked to the party system. Placing protests on an ideological scale, we find that protests that express liberal issues increases vote share for Democratic candidates, while protests that espouse conservative issues offer Republican candidates a greater share of the two-party vote. However, minority protests, which often express liberal concerns, uniquely lead to a greater percentage of the two-party vote share for Democratic candidates. In addition, this study shows that minority protest produces a “vulnerability effect,” which leads quality candidates to enter subsequent races to challenge incumbents.

Keywords

ProtestElectionsRaceSocial MovementsVoter TurnoutMinorityPolitical Party
Type
Chapter
Information
Can America Govern Itself? , pp. 14
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agnone, Jon. 2007. “Amplifying Public Opinion: The Policy Impact of the U.S. Environmental Movement.” Social Forces 85: 1593–1620.Google Scholar
Almuhkhtar, Sarah, Bezaquen, Mercy, Cave, Damien, Chinoy, Sahil, Davis, Kenan, Keller, Josh, Rebecca Lai, K.K., Lee, Jasmine C., Oliver, Rochelle, Park, Haeyoun and Royal, Destinée-Charisse. 2018. “Black Lives Upended By Policing: The Raw Videos Sparking Outrage.” The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/19/us/police-videos-race.html (last accessed March 9, 2018).Google Scholar
Allen, Jonathan. 2018. “Florida Governor Signs Gun-Safety Bill into Law After School Shooting.” Reuters. Retrieved from www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-florida-law/florida-governor-signs-gun-safety-bill-into-law-after-school-shooting-idUSKCN1GL2RA (last accessed March 9, 2018).Google Scholar
Amenta, Edwin. 2006. When Movements Matter: The Townsend Plan and the Rise of Social Security. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Amenta, Edwin, and Caren, Neal. 2004. “The Legislative, Organizational, and Beneficiary Consequences of State-Oriented Challengers.” In The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, ed. Snow, David, Soule, Sarah A., and Kriesi, Hanspeter. London: Blackwell. Pp. 461–488.Google Scholar
Amenta, Edwin, Caren, Neal, Chiarello, Elizabeth, and Yang, Su. 2010. “The Political Consequences of Social Movements.” Annual Review of Sociology 36: 287–307.Google Scholar
Amenta, Edwin, Carruthers, Bruce G., and Zylan, Yvonne. 1992. “A Hero for the Aged? The Townsend Movement, the Political Mediation Model, and U.S. Old-Age Policy, 1934–1950.” American Journal of Sociology 98: 308–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Kenneth. 2004. Freedom Is a Constant Struggle: The Mississippi Civil Rights Movement and Its Legacy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Snyder, James M. Jr, and Stewart, Charles III. 2000. “Old Voters, New Voters, and the Personal Vote: Using Redistricting to Measure the Incumbency Advantage.” American Journal of Political Science 44: 17–34.Google Scholar
Arnold, R. Douglas. 1990. The Logic of Congressional Action. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Arnold, Jenna, Bond, Kanisha, Chenoweth, Erica, and Pressman, Jeremy. 2018. “These Are the Four Largest Protests Since Trump Was Inaugurated.” The Washington Post, Monkey Cage. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/05/31/these-are-the-four-largest-protests-since-trump-was-inaugurated/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.13d90a7ae1ea (last accessed May 31, 2018).Google Scholar
Austen-Smith, David, and Banks, Jeffrey. 1989. “Electoral Accountability and Incumbency.” In Models of Strategic Choice in Politics, ed. Ordeshook, Peter. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Pp. 121–150.Google Scholar
Banks, Jeffrey S., and Kiewiet, D. Roderick. 1989. “Explaining Patterns of Candidate Competition in Congressional Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 33: 997–1015.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1996. “Uninformed Votes: Information Effects in Presidential Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 40: 194–230.Google Scholar
Baybeck, Brady, and McClurg, Scott. 2005. “What Do They Know and How Do They Know It? An Examination of Citizen Awareness of Context.” American Politics Research 33: 492–520.Google Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel, and Katz, Jonathan. 1995. “What to Do (and Not to Do) With Time-Series Cross-Section Data.” American Political Science Review 89: 634–647.Google Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel, and Katz, Jonathan. 2001. “Throwing Out the Baby with the Bath Water: A Comment on Green, Kim and Yoon.” International Organizations 55: 487–495.Google Scholar
Bianco, William T. 1984. “Strategic Decisions on Candidacy in U. S. Congressional Districts.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 9: 351–364.Google Scholar
Black, Merle. 1978. “Racial Composition of Congressional Districts and Support for Federal Voting Rights in the American South.” Social Science Quarterly 59: 435–350.Google Scholar
Bloom, Howard S., and Price, H. Douglas. 1975. “Voter Response to Short-Run Economic Conditions: The Asymmetric Effect of Prosperity and Recession.” The American Political Science Review 69: 1240–1254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, Charles. 1981. “Congressional Voting and the Mobilization of a Black Electorate in the South.” Journal of Politics 43: 662–682.Google Scholar
Button, James. 1989. Blacks and Social Change: Impact of the Civil Rights Movement in Southern Communities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cava, Marco. 2018. “After Stephon Clark Shooting, Cries for Change — and Painful Echoes of Past Deaths.” USA Today. Retrieved from www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/03/29/sacramento-hopes-set-national-example-after-stephon-clark-shooting/471713002/ (last accessed March 30, 2018).Google Scholar
Chenoweth, Erica, Pinckney, Jonathan, Pressman, Jeremy, and Zunes, Stephen. 2017. “In Trump’s America, Who’s Protesting and Why? Here’s Our February Report.” The Washington Post, Monkey Cage. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/04/05/in-trumps-america-whos-protesting-and-why-heres-our-february-report/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.022f0062ebc5 (last accessed April 5, 2017).Google Scholar
Chenoweth, Erica, and Pressman, Jeremy. 2017. “Last month, 83% of U.S. protests Were Against Trump.” The Washington Post, Monkey Cage. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/09/25/charlottesville-and-its-aftermath-brought-out-many-protesters-in-august-but-still-more-were-against-trump-and-his-policies/?utm_term=.38e79b8afb9b (last accessed September 28, 2017).Google Scholar
Cho, Wendy, and Rudolph, Thomas. 2008. “Emanating Political Participation: Untangling the Spatial Structure Behind Participation.” British Journal of Political Science 38(2): 273–289.Google Scholar
Claassen, Ryan L. 2007. “Floating Voters and Floating Activists: Political Change and Information.” Political Research Quarterly 60: 124–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costain, Anne, and Costain, Douglas. 1987. “Strategy and Tactics of the Women’s Movement in the United States: The Role of Political Parties.” In The Women’s Movements of the United States and Western Europe, ed. Katzenstein, M. and Mueller, C.. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Pp. 196–214.Google Scholar
Cover, Albert D. 1977. “One Good Term Deserves Another: The Advantage of Incumbency in Congressional Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 21: 523–541.Google Scholar
Cover, Albert D., and Brumberg, Bruce S.. 1982. “Baby Books and Ballots: The Impact of Congressional Mail on Constituent Opinion.” The American Political Science Review 76: 347–359.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and Katz, Jonathan N.. 1996. “Why Did the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections Grow?” American Journal of Political Science 40: 478–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damore, David F. 2004. “The Dynamics of Issue Ownership in Presidential Campaigns.” Political Research Quarterly 57: 391–397.Google Scholar
Davenport, Christian, Soule, Sarah, and Armstrong, David. 2011. “Protesting While Black? The Differential Policing of American Activism, 1960 to 1990.” American Sociological Review 76: 152–176.Google Scholar
Delli-Carpini, Michael, and Keeter, Scott. 1996. What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Del Real, Jose. 2018. “Stephon Clark’s Official Autopsy Conflicts with Earlier Findings.” The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2018/05/01/us/stephon-clark-official-autopsy.html (last accessed May 1, 2018).Google Scholar
Earl, Jennifer, Soule, Sarah, and McCarthy, John. 2003. “Protest under Fire? Explaining the Policing of Protest.” American Sociological Review 68: 581–606.Google Scholar
Earl, Jennifer S., and Soule, Sarah A.. 2006. “Seeing Blue: A Police-Centered Explanation of Protest Policing.” Mobilization: An International Journal 11: 145–164.Google Scholar
Earl, Jennifer, Martin, Andrew, McCarthy, John D., and Soule, Sarah A.. 2004. “Newspapers and Protest Event Analysis.” Annual Review of Sociology 30: 65–80.Google Scholar
Epstein, David, and Zemsky, Peter. 1995. “Money Talks: Deterring Quality Challengers in Congressional Elections.” The American Political Science Review 89: 295–308.Google Scholar
Eulau, Heinz, and Rothenberg, Lawrence. 1986. “Life Space and Social Networks as Political Contexts.” Political Behavior 8: 130–157.Google Scholar
Fair, Ray C. 1978. “The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for President.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 60: 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferejohn, John. 1986. “Incumbent Performance and Electoral Control.” Public Choice 50: 5–25.Google Scholar
Fetner, Tina. 2008. How the Religious Right Shaped Lesbian and Gay Activism (Social Movements, Protest and Contention). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1974. Representatives, Roll Calls, and Constituencies. Minneapolis: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1990. “Estimating Incumbency Advantage without Bias.” American Journal of Political Science 34: 1142–1164.Google Scholar
Gillion, Daniel Q. 2012. “The Influence of Protest Activity on Congressional Behavior: The Scope of Minority Protests in the District.” Journal of Politics 74: 950–962.Google Scholar
Gillion, Daniel Q. 2013. The Political Power of Protest: Minority Activism and Shifts in Public Policy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Giugni, Marco. 2007. “Useless Protest? A Time-Series Analysis of the Policy Outcomes of Ecology, Antinuclear, and Peace Movements in the United States, 1977–1995.” Mobilization: An International Quarterly 12: 53–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Großer, Jens, and Schram, Arthur. 2006. “Neighborhood Information Exchange and Voter Participation: An Experimental Study.” The American Political Science Review 100: 235–248.Google Scholar
Harris, Fredrick and Gillion, Daniel. 2010. “Expanding the Possibilities: Reconceptualizing Political Participation as a Tool Box.” In The Oxford Handbook of American Elections and Political Behavior, ed. Leighley, Jan. Oxford University Press. Pp. 144–161.Google Scholar
Heaney, Michael T. and Rojas, Fabio. 2011. “The Partisan Dynamics of Contention: Demobilization of the Antiwar Movement in the United States, 2007–2009.” Mobilization: An International Journal 16: 41–54.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert, and Sprague, John. 1987. “Networks in Context: The Social Flow of Political Information.” The American Political Science Review 81: 1197–1216.Google Scholar
Huckshorn, Robert Jack, and Spencer, Robert Clark. 1971. The Politics of Defeat: Campaigning for Congress. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1987. The Politics of Congressional Elections. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1990. “The Effects of Campaign Spending in House Election: New Evidence for Old Arguments.” American Journal of Political Science 34: 334–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
John, Page, Elmahrek, Adam, and Winton, Richard. 2018. “Hundreds Rally in Sacramento After Stephon Clark Autopsy Raises New Questions in Police Shooting.” Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-stephon-clark-protest-20180331-story.html (last accessed March 31, 2018).Google Scholar
Kasler, Dale, Bizjak, Tony, Chavez, Nashelly, and Sangree, Hudson. 2018. “Protesters Block Golden 1 Center, Again, After Disrupting Council Meeting on Shooting of Stephon Clark.” The Sacramento Bee. Retrieved from www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article207081079.html (last accessed March 28, 2018).Google Scholar
Kenny, Christopher B. 1992. “Political Participation and Effects from the Social Environment.” American Journal of Political Science 36: 259–267.Google Scholar
Kernell, Samuel. 1978. “Explaining Presidential Popularity. How Ad Hoc Theorizing, Misplaced Emphasis, and Insufficient Care in Measuring One’s Variables Refuted Common Sense and Led Conventional Wisdom Down the Path of Anomalies.” The American Political Science Review 72: 506–522.Google Scholar
King, Brayden, Bentele, Keith, and Soule, Sarah. 2007. “Protest and Policymaking: Explaining Fluctuation in Congressional Attention to Rights Issues, 1960–1986.” Social Forces 86: 137–163.Google Scholar
Koseff, Alexei. 2018. “Police Could Only Use Deadly Force When ‘Necessary’ under New California proposal.” The Sacramento Bee. Retrieved from www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article207741689.html (last accessed April 10, 2018).Google Scholar
Kramer, Gerald H. 1971. “Short-Term Fluctuations in U.S. Voting Behavior, 1896–1964.” The American Political Science Review 65: 131–143.Google Scholar
Lee, Taeku. 2002. Mobilizing Public Opinion: Black Insurgency and Racial Attitudes in the Civil Rights. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Leuthold, David A. 1968. Electioneering in a Democracy: Campaigns for Congress. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Levitt, Steven D., and Wolfram, Catherine D.. 1997. “Decomposing the Sources of Incumbency Advantage in the U. S. House.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 22: 45–60.Google Scholar
Lohmann, Susanne. 1994. “Information Aggregation through Costly Political Action.” The American Economic Review 84: 518–530.Google Scholar
Luders, Joseph E. 2010. The Civil Rights Movement and the Logic of Social Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Malhotra, Neil, and Kuo, Alexander G.. 2008. “Attributing Blame: The Public’s Response to Hurricane Katrina.” The Journal of Politics 70: 120–135.Google Scholar
Mann, Thomas E., and Wolfinger, Raymond E.. 1980. “Candidates and Parties in Congressional Elections.” The American Political Science Review 74: 617–632.Google Scholar
McAdam, Doug. 1982. Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McAdam, Doug, and Tarrow, Sidney. 2010. “Ballots and Barricades: On the Reciprocal Relationship between Elections and Social Movements.” Perspectives on Politics 8: 529–542.Google Scholar
McAdam, Doug, and Tarrow, Sidney. 2013. “Social Movements and Elections: Toward a Broader Understanding of the Political Context of Contention.” Pp. 325–346 in The Future of Social Movement Research: Dynamics, Mechanisms, and Processes. Edited by van Stekelenburg, Jacquelien, Roggeband, Conny, and Klandermans, Bert. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
McAdam, Doug, and Yang, Su. 2002. “The War at Home: Antiwar Protests and Congressional Voting, 1965 to 1973.” American Sociological Review 67: 696–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKelvey, Richard D., and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1986. “Information, Electoral Equilibria, and the Democratic Ideal.” The Journal of Politics 48: 909–937.Google Scholar
McPhee, William. 1963. “Note on a Campaign Simulator.” In Formal Theories of Mass Behavior, ed. McPhee, William. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
McVeigh, Rory, Myers, Daniel J., and Sikkink, David. 2004. “Corn, Klansmen, and Coolidge: Structure and Framing in Social Movements.” Social Forces 83: 653–690.Google Scholar
Meltzer, Allan H., and Vellrath, Marc. 1975. “The Effects of Economic Policies on Votes for the Presidency: Some Evidence from Recent Elections: Reply.” Journal of Law and Economics 18: 803–805.Google Scholar
Olzak, Susan, and Soule, Sarah. 2009. “Cross-Cutting Influences of Environmental Protest and Legislation.” Social Forces 88: 201–225.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., and Shapiro, Robert Y.. 1992. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences (American Politics and Political Economy Series). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Petrocik, John R, Benoit, William L., and Hansen, Glenn J.. 2003. “Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952–2000.” Political Science Quarterly 118: 599–626.Google Scholar
Petrocik, John R. 1996. “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study.” American Journal of Political Science 40(3): 825–250.Google Scholar
Prior, Markus. 2006. “The Incumbent in the Living Room: The Rise of Television and the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections.” The Journal of Politics 68: 657–673.Google Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., and Hansen, John Mark. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sigelman, Lee, and Buell, Emmett H. Jr. 2004. “Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960–2000.” American Journal of Political Science 48: 650–661.Google Scholar
Soule, Sarah, and Davenport, Christian. 2009. “Velvet Glove, Iron Fist or Even Hand? Protest Policing in the United States, 1960–1990.” Mobilization: An International Quarterly 14: 1–22.Google Scholar
Soule, Sarah, McAdam, Doug, McCarthy, John, and Su, Yang. 1999. “Protest Events: Cause or Consequence of State Action? The U.S. Women’s Movement and Federal Congressional Activities, 1956–1979.” Mobilization: An International Quarterly 4: 239–256.Google Scholar
Soule, Sarah A., and King, Brayden. 2006. “The Stages of the Policy Process and the Equal Rights Amendment, 1972–1982.” American Journal of Sociology 111: 1871–1909.Google Scholar
Soule, Sarah A., and Olzak, Susan. 2004. “When Do Movements Matter? The Politics of Contingency and the Equal Rights Amendment.” American Sociological Review 69: 473–497.Google Scholar
Soule, Sarah A., and King, Brayden G. 2008. “Competition and Resource Partitioning in Three Social Movement Industries.” American Journal of Sociology 113: 1568–1610.Google Scholar
Soule, Sarah A., and Earl, Jennifer. 2005. “A Movement Society Evaluated: Collective Protest in the United States, 1960–1986.” Mobilization 10(3): 345–364.Google Scholar
Sprague, John. 1982. “Is There a Micro Theory Consistent with Contextual Analysis.” In Strategies of Political Inquiry, ed. Ostrom, Elinor. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Sulkin, Tracy. 2005. Issue Politics in Congress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thrush, Glenn, and Haberman, Maggie. 2017. “Trump Is Criticized for Not Calling Out White Supremacists.” The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2017/08/12/us/trump-charlottesville-protest-nationalist-riot.html (last accessed August 12, 2017).Google Scholar
Tufte, Edward R. 1975. “Determinants of the Outcomes of Midterm Congressional Elections.” The American Political Science Review 69: 812–826.Google Scholar
Van Dyke, Nella, Soule, Sarah A., and Taylor, Verta A.. 2004. “The Targets of Social Movements: Beyond a Focus on the State.” Research in Social Movements, Conflict and Change 25: 27–51.Google Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Brady, Henry. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wang, Amy. 2017. “Trump Breaks Silence on Charlottesville: ‘No Place for This Kind of Violence in America.’” The Washington Post Monkey Cage. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/08/12/trump-responds-to-charlottesville-protests/?utm_term=.0b39eaef6b97 (last accessed August 12, 2017).Google Scholar
Wang, Dan J., and Soule, Sarah A.. 2012. “Social Movement Organizational Collaboration: Networks of Learning and the Diffusion of Protest Tactics, 1960–1995.” The American Journal of Sociology 117(6): 1674–1722.Google Scholar
Whitby, Kenny J. 1987. “Measuring Congressional Responsiveness to the Policy Interests of Black Constituents.” Social Science Quarterly 68: 367–377.Google Scholar
Young, Lisa. 1996. “Women’s Movements and Political Parties.” Party Politics 2: 229–250.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×