Advertisement

Political Behavior

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 237–282 | Cite as

Explaining Women's Rights Realignment: Convention Delegates, 1972–1992

  • Christina Wolbrecht
Article

Abstract

Since the early 1970s, the major American parties have moved from general consensus on women's rights issues to sharp polarization. While previous efforts to explain this realignment have identified pieces of the puzzle, these explanations have been generally incomplete and atheoretical. I argue that party positions are determined by the perceived value of specific issue positions for maintaining and expanding the party's coalition of electoral support. Thus, changes in both the composition of the party's coalition and the way the issue is defined and understood can bring about changes in the issue positions adopted by parties. Using the Convention Delegate Studies (1972–1992), this research suggests that both replacement (coalition change) and in the case of Democrats, conversion (caused by issue change) have been important mechanisms for bringing about party realignment on women's rights. This explanation both encompasses causal factors highlighted by previous scholars and points to other important contributing causes.

political parties realignment women women's movement abortion feminism 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Adams, Greg (1997). Abortion: evidence of issue evolution. American Journal of Political Science 41: 718–37.Google Scholar
  2. Andersen, Kristi (1979). The Creation of a Democratic Majority, 1928-1936. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Asher, Herbert B., and Weisberg, Herbert F. (1978). Voting change in congress: some dynamic perspectives on an evolutionary process. American Journal of Political Science 22: 391–425.Google Scholar
  4. Baer, Denise L., and Bositis, David A. (1988). Elite Cadres and Party Coalitions: Representing the Public in Party Politics. New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  5. Baumgartner, Frank R., and Jones, Bryan D. (1993). Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, Paul Allen (1974). A socialization theory of partisan realignment. In Richard G. Niemi (ed.), The Politics of Future Citizens. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  7. Budge, Ian, and Hofferbert, Richard I. (1990). Mandates and policy outputs: U.S. party platforms and federal expenditures. American Political Science Review 84(March): 111–131.Google Scholar
  8. Carmines, Edward G. and Stimson, James A. (1989). Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Costain, Anne N. (1991). After Reagan: new party attitudes toward gender. Annals of the American Academy 515: 114–125.Google Scholar
  10. Costain, Anne N. (1992). Inviting Women's Rebellion: A Political Process Interpretation of the Women's Movement. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Davis, Flora (1991). Moving the Mountain: The Women's Movement in America since 1960. New York: Simon &Schuster.Google Scholar
  12. Downs, Anthony (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  13. Erikson, Robert S. and Tedin, Kent L. (1981). The 1928-1936 partisan realignment: the case for the conversion hypothesis. American Political Science Review 75(December): 951–962.Google Scholar
  14. Freeman, Jo (1975). The Politics of Women's Liberation: A Case Study of an Emerging Social Movement and Its Relation to the Policy Process. New York: David McKay Company.Google Scholar
  15. Freeman, Jo (1986). The political culture of the Democratic and Republican parties. Political Science Quarterly 101: 327–356.Google Scholar
  16. Freeman, Jo (1987). Whom you know versus whom you represent: feminist influence in the Democratic and Republican parties. In Mary Fainsod Katzenstein and Carol M. Mueller (eds.), The Women's Movements of the United States and Western Europe: Consciousness, Political Opportunity, and Public Policy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Freeman, Jo (1993). Feminism vs. family values: women at the 1992 Democratic and Republican conventions. PS: Political Science and Politics 26: 21–28.Google Scholar
  18. Freeman, Jo (2000). A Room at a Time: How Women Entered Party Politics. Lanham, MD: Rowman &Littlefield.Google Scholar
  19. Hartmann, Susan M. (1989). From Margin to Mainstream: American Women and Politics Since 1960. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  20. Herrera, Richard (1995). The crosswinds of change: sources of change in the Democratic and Republican parties. Political Research Quarterly 48(June): 291–312.Google Scholar
  21. Herrera, Richard, and Miller, Warren E. (1995). Convention Delegate Study, 1992 [Computer file]. Conducted by Richard Herrera and Warren E. Miller, Arizona State University. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor].Google Scholar
  22. Key, V. O., Jr. (1955). A theory of critical elections. Journal of Politics 17(February): 3–18.Google Scholar
  23. Key, V. O., Jr. (1959). Secular realignment and the party system. Journal of Politics 21(May): 198–210.Google Scholar
  24. Klatch, Rebecca E. (1987). Women of the New Right. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Krukones, Michael G. (1984). Promises and Performances: Presidential Campaigns as Policy Predictor. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  26. Larsen, Richard J. and Marx, Morris L. (1986). An Introduction to Mathematical Statistics and Its Applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  27. Luker, Kristin (1984). Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Maisel, L. Sandy (1993-1994). The platform-writing process: candidate-centered platforms in (1992). Political Science Quarterly 108(Winter): 671–698.Google Scholar
  29. Mansbridge, Jane J. (1986). Why We Lost the ERA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  30. Martin, Andrew D. and Wolbrecht, Christina (2000). Partisanship and pre-floor behavior: the equal rights and school prayer amendments. Political Research Quarterly 53(December): 711–720.Google Scholar
  31. Melich, Tanya (1996). The Republican War Against Women: An Insider's Report from Behind the Lines. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
  32. Miller, Warren E. (1988). Without Consent: Mass-Elite Linkages in Presidential Politics. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.Google Scholar
  33. Miller, Warren E., Donavan, Elizabeth, Crotty, William, and Kirkpatrick, Jane (1976). Convention Delegate Study of 1972: Women in Politics [Computer file]. Conducted by University of Michigan, Survey Research Center. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor].Google Scholar
  34. Miller, Warren E., and Jennings, M. Kent (1988). Convention Delegate Study, 1984 [Computer file]. Conducted by the University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor].Google Scholar
  35. Miller, Warren E., and Jennings, M. Kent (1995). Convention Delegate Study, 1988 [Computer file]. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor].Google Scholar
  36. Miller, Warren E., Jennings, M. Kent, and Farah, Barbara G. (1985). Convention Delegate Study, 1980 [Computer file]. Conducted by University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor].Google Scholar
  37. Miller, Warren E., and Jennings, M. Kent, in association with Barbara G. Farah (1986). Parties in Transition: A Longitudinal Study of Party Elites and Party Supporters. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  38. Petrocik, John R. (1981). Party Coalitions: Realignments and the Decline of the New Deal Party System. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  39. Pomper, Gerald M., with Lederman, Susan S. (1980). Elections in America: Control and Influence in Democratic Politics, 2nd Ed. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  40. Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard (1991). Patterns in congressional voting. American Journal of Political Science 35: 228–278.Google Scholar
  41. Pressman, Jeffrey L. (1977-1978). Groups and group caucuses. Political Science Quarterly 92(Winter): 673–682.Google Scholar
  42. Rapoport, Ronald B., and Stone, Walter J. (1994). A model for disaggregating political change. Political Behavior 16(4): 505–532.Google Scholar
  43. Roback, Thomas H. (1975). Amateurs and professionals: delegates to the 1972 Republican national convention. Journal of Politics 37(May): 436–468.Google Scholar
  44. Salisbury, Robert H., and MacKuen, Michael (1981). On the study of party realignment. Journal of Politics 43(May): 523–530.Google Scholar
  45. Sanbonmatsu, Kira (2002). Democrats, Republicans, and the Politics of Women's Place. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  46. Sapiro, Virginia, and Farah, Barbara G. (1980). New pride and old prejudice: political ambition and role orientations among female partisan elites. Women &Politics 1: 13–36.Google Scholar
  47. Schattschneider, E. E. (1942). Party Government. New York: Farrar and Rinehart.Google Scholar
  48. Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  49. Stanley, Alessandra (1992). 'Family values' and women: Is G.O.P. a house divided? New York Times, August 21, p. A1.Google Scholar
  50. Sullivan, Denis G., Pressman, Jeffrey L., and Arterton, Christopher F. (1976). Explorations in Convention Decision Making: The Democratic Party in the 1970s. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  51. Tabor, Mary B. W., and Applebome, Peter (1992). Voices of women in the 'family values' debate: a sampling, north and south. New York Times, August 21, p. A13.Google Scholar
  52. Wolbrecht, Christina (2000). The Politics of Women's Rights: Parties, Positions, and Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christina Wolbrecht
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Notre DameNotre Dame

Personalised recommendations