Social Indicators Research

, Volume 128, Issue 3, pp 1405–1423 | Cite as

Direct Democracy and Subjective Well-Being: The Initiative and Life Satisfaction in the American States

Article

Abstract

This paper considers the effect of direct democracy on quality of life in the American States. Specifically, it seeks to determine to what extent the use of the initiative affects satisfaction with life. The theoretical discussion draws upon traditional arguments over direct democracy, along with contemporary research on the quality of representation in the United States. The empirical results suggest that satisfaction varies positively with the extent to which initiatives are used. We also find that this relationship is mediated by income, such that the positive effects of direct democracy are most pronounced for those with the lowest income. The consequences for our understanding of direct democracy, public policy, and the study of life satisfaction are discussed.

Keywords

Direct democracy Life satisfaction Subjective well-being Welfare state American States 

References

  1. Alvarez-Diaz, A., Gonzales, L., & Radcliff, B. (2010). The politics of happiness: On the political determinants of quality of life in the American states. Journal of Politics, 72(3), 894–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barber, B. R. (1984). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bartels, L. M. (2008). Unequal democracy: The political economy of the new gilded age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Benz, M., & Stutzer, A. (2004). Are voters better informed when they have a larger say in politics? Public Choice, 119, 21–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Biggers, D. R. (2012). Can a social issue proposition increase political knowledge? Campaign learning and the educative effects of direct democracy. American Politics Research, 40(6), 998–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blomberg, S. Brock, Hess, G. D., & Weerapana, A. (2004). The impact of voter initiatives on economic activity. European Journal of Political Economy, 20(1), 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blume, L., Muller, J., & Stefan, V. (2009). The economic effects of direct democracy—A first global assessment. Public Choice, 140, 431–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boehmke, F., & Bowen, D. (2010). Direct democracy and individual interest group membership. Journal of Politics, 72(3), 659–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (1998). Demanding choices: Opinion, voting, and direct democracy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2002). Democracy, institutions and attitudes about citizen influence on government. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 371–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2004). Measuring the effect of direct democracy on state policy: Not all initiatives are created equal. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 4(2), 346–363.Google Scholar
  12. Bowler, S., Nicholson, S. P., & Segura, G. M. (2006). Earthquakes and aftershocks: Race, direct democracy, and partisan change. American Journal of Political Science, 50(1), 146–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Citrin, J. (1996). Who’s the boss? Direct democracy and popular control of government. In S. C. Craig (Ed.), Broken contract: Changing relationships between Americans and their government (pp. 268–293). Westview: Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  14. Di Tella, R., MacCulloch, R. J., & Oswald, A. J. (2003). The macroeconomics of happiness. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 809–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Donovan, T., Bowler, S., & McCuan, D. (2001). Political consultants and the initiative industrial complex. In L. Sabato, B. Larson, & H. Ernst (Eds.), Dangerous democracy? The battle over ballot initiatives in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  16. Donovan, T., Bowler, S., McCuan, D., & Fernandez, K. (1998). Contenting players and strategies: Opposition advantages in initiative elections. In S. Bowler, T. Donovan, & C. Tolbert (Eds.), Citizens as legislators: Direct democracy in the United States. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Dorn, D., Fischer, Justina A. V., Kirchgassner, G., & Sousa-Poza, A. (2007). Is it culture or democracy? The impact of democracy and culture on happiness. Social Indicators Research, 82(3), 505–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dorn, D., Fischer, Justina A. V., Kirchgassner, G., & Sousa-Poza, A. (2008). Direct democracy and life satisfaction revisited: New evidence for Switzerland. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 227–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dyck, J. J. (2009). Initiated distrust: Direct democracy and trust in government. American Politics Research, 37, 539–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dyck, J. J. (2012). Racial threat, direct legislation, and social trust: Taking tyranny seriously in studies of the ballot initiative. Political Research Quarterly, 65(3), 615–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dyck, J. J., & Lascher, E. L. (2009). Direct democracy and political efficacy reconsidered. Political Behavior, 31, 401–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ellis, R. (2002). Democratic delusions: The initiative process in America. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  23. Ernst, H. R. (2001). The historical role of narrow-material interests in initiative politics. In L. Sabato, H. Ernst, & B. Larson (Eds.), Dangerous democracy? The battle over ballot initiatives in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  24. Feld, L. P., & Kirchgassner, G. (2001). Does direct democracy reduce public debt? Evidence from swiss municipalities. Public Choice, 109, 347–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Flavin, P. (2012a). Income inequality and policy representation in the American states. American Politics Research, 40(1), 29–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Flavin, P. (2012b). Direct democracy and political equality in the American States. Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  27. Flavin, P., & Griffin, J. (2009). Policy, preferences, and participation: Government’s impact on democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics, 71(2), 544–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Flavin, P., & Griffin, J. (2011). How citizens and legislators prioritize spheres of representation. Political Research Quarterly, 64(3), 520–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Flavin, P., Pacek, A. C., & Radcliff, B. (2010). Labor unions and life satisfaction: Evidence from new data. Social Indicators Research, 98(3), 435–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2000). Happiness, economy, and institutions. Economic Journal, 110(446), 918–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). Happiness and economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Gamble, B. (1997). Putting civil rights to a popular vote. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 245–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gerber, E. R. (1999). The populist paradox: Interest group influence and the promise of direct legislation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Gilens, M. (2005). Inequality and democratic responsiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(5), 778–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Graham, C. (2009). Happiness around the world. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Griffin, J., & Flavin, P. (2007). Racial differences in information, expectations, and accountability. Journal of Politics, 69(1), 220–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Haider-Markel, D. P., Querze, A., & Lindaman, K. (2007). Lose, win, or draw? A reexamination of direct democracy and minority rights. Political Research Quarterly, 60(2), 304–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hajnal, Z., Gerber, E., & Louch, H. (2002). Minorities and direct legislation: Evidence from California ballot proposition elections. Journal of Politics, 64, 154–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hero, R., & Tolbert, C. (1996). A racial/ethnic diversity interpretation of politics and policy in the states of the U.S. American Journal of Political Science, 40(3), 851–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hero, R., & Tolbert, C. (2004). Minority voices and citizen attitudes about government responsiveness in the American states: Do social and institutional context matter? British Journal of Political Science, 34, 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hill, K. Q., & Leighley, J. (1992). The policy consequences of class bias in state electorates. American Journal of Political Science, 36(2), 351–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Inglehart, R., Foa, R., Peterson, C., & Welzel, C. (2008). Development, freedom, and rising happiness. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(4), 264–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Inglehart, R., & Klingemann, H.-D. (2000). Genes, culture, democracy, and happiness. In E. Diener & E. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 165–183). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  44. Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California. (2012). IRI historical database. http://www.iandrinstitute.org/data.htm
  45. Lane, R. (2000). The loss of happiness in market democracies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Lindblom, C. (1977). Politics and markets. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  47. Lupia, A., & Matsusaka, J. (2004). Direct democracy: New approaches to old questions. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 463–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Matsusaka, J. (1995). Fiscal effects of the voter initiative: Evidence from the last 30 years. Journal of Political Economy, 103, 587–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Matsusaka, J. (2001). Problems with a methodology used to evaluate the voter initiative. Journal of Politics, 63, 1250–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Matsusaka, J. (2004). For the many or the few: The initiative process, public policy, and American democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Matsusaka, J. (2005). Direct democracy works. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(2), 185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Matsusaka, J. (2007). Disentangling the direct and indirect effects of the initiative process. Mimeo, University of Southern California, June 2007.Google Scholar
  53. Ouweneel, P. (2002). Social security and well-being of the unemployed in 42 nations. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(2), 167–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pacek, A. (2009). Politics and happiness: An empirical ledger. In A. Dutt (Ed.), Happiness, economics, and politics. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  55. Pacek, A., & Radcliff, B. (2008). Assessing the welfare state: The politics of happiness. Perspectives on Politics, 6(2), 267–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Radcliff, B. (2001). Politics, markets, and life satisfaction: The political economy of human happiness. American Political Science Review, 95(4), 939–952.Google Scholar
  59. Radcliff, B. (2013). The political economy of human happiness: How voters’ choices determine the quality of life. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rothstein, B. (2010). Happiness and the welfare state. Social Research, 77(2), 441–648.Google Scholar
  61. Santerre, R. E. (1989). Representative versus direct democracy: Are there any expenditure differences? Public Choice, 60(2), 145–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semisovereign people: A realists view of democracy in America. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
  63. Schlozman, D., & Yohai, I. (2008). How initiatives don’t always make citizens: Ballot initiatives in the American states, 1978–2004. Political Behavior, 30, 469–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Smith, M. (2002). Ballot initiatives and the democratic citizen. Journal of Politics, 64, 892–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Smith, G. (2009). Democratic innovations: Designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2001). The initiative to party: Partisanship and ballot initiatives in California. Party Politics, 7(6), 781–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2004). Educated by initiative: The effects of direct democracy on citizens and political organizations in the American states. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2007). The instrumental and educative effects of ballot measures: Research on direct democracy in the American states. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 7(4), 416–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stadelmann-Steffen, I., & Vatter, A. (2012). Does satisfaction with democracy really increase happiness? Direct democracy and individual satisfaction in Switzerland. Political Behavior, 34, 535–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tolbert, C. J. (2003). Direct democracy and institutional realignment in the American states. Political Science Quarterly, 118(3), 467–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tolbert, C. J., & Hero, R. E. (1996). Race/ethnicity and direct democracy: An analysis of California’s illegal immigration initiative. Journal of Politics, 58(3), 806–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tolbert, C. J., McNeal, R. S., & Smith, D. A. (2003). Enhancing civic engagement: The effect of direct democracy on political participation and knowledge. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 3, 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. United States Department of Labor. 2013. Changes in basic minimum wages in non-farm employment under state law: Selected years 1968 to 2013. Accessed online March 20, 2013. http://www.dol.gov/whd/state/stateMinWageHis.htm
  74. Veenhoven, R. (1996). Developments in satisfaction research. Social Indicators Research, 37, 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Veenhoven, R. (2000). Well-being in the welfare state: Level not higher, distribution not more equitable. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 2(1), 91–125.Google Scholar
  76. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. (1995). Voice & equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Wolfson, M. (2012). “Right to Work” Lowers WagesAnd That’s a Fact!” Higgins Labor Studies Program. University of Notre Dame. Accessed March 12, 2013. http://higginslabor.nd.edu/assets/56074/hlsp_commentary_jan_2012.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Arkansas at Little RockLittle RockUSA

Personalised recommendations