Intersectional Advocacy and Policymaking Across US States

  • Kathleen MarchettiEmail author
Part of the The Politics of Intersectionality book series (POLI)


How are intersectional identities represented in politics? Using an original survey of 204 advocacy groups in 14 US states, this research considers how state legislative and lobbying conditions shape interest groups’ inclusion of intersectional issues on their policy agendas. Several aspects of state legislative environments, including the proportion of women in the state legislature and levels of legislative professionalism, affect the diversity of groups’ policy agendas, whereas aggregate measures of lobbying context have surprisingly little effect. A case study of Colorado’s 2011–2012 legislative agenda supplements these findings by considering the extent to which advocacy groups were able to promote intersectional policies within state government. This descriptive analysis shows that intersectionality was represented within Colorado’s legislative agenda but that many intersectional bills died over the course of the policymaking process. Though advocacy groups seem to play a key agenda-setting role within state legislative spaces, their work may not immediately produce laws that employ an intersectional framework in their purpose and implementation.


  1. Berger, M. T. (2004). Workable Sisterhood: The Political Journey of Women Stigmatized Women with HIV/AIDS. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Berry, J. (1977). Lobbying for the People: The Political Behavior of Public Interest Groups. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Berry, J., Portney, K., Lissm, R., Simoncelli, J., & Berger, L. (2006). Power and Interest Groups in City Politics. Cambridge, MA: Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  4. Beyers, J., & Kerremans, B. (2007). Critical Resource Dependencies and the Europeanization of Domestic Interest Groups. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(3), 460–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, N. (2014). Sisters in the Statehouse: Black Women & Legislative Decision Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Browne, W. P. (1990). Organized Interests and Their Issue Niches: A Search for Pluralism in a Policy Domain. Journal of Politics, 52, 477–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carbado, D. W. (2013). Colorblind Intersectionality. Signs Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(4), 811–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chun, J. J., Lipsitz, G., & Shin, Y. (2013). Intersectionality as a Social Movement Strategy: Asian Immigrant Women Advocates. Signs Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(4), 917–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen, C. J. (1999). The Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dill, B. T. (1983). Race, Class, and Gender: Prospects for an All-Inclusive Sisterhood. Feminist Studies, 9, 131–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eising, R. (2007). Institutional Context, Organizational Resources and Strategic Choices: Explaining Interest Group Access in the European Union. European Union Politics, 8(3), 329–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fredman, S. (2005). Double Trouble: Multiple Discrimination and EU Law. European Anti-Discrimination Law Review, 2, 13–21.Google Scholar
  14. Goldberg, S. B. (2008). Intersectionality in Theory and Practice. In E. Grabham, D. Cooper, J. Krishnadas, & D. Herman (Eds.), Intersectionality and Beyond: Law, Power and the Politics of Location. Cavendish: Routledge-Cavendish.Google Scholar
  15. Gray, V., & Lowery, D. (1996). A Niche Theory of Interest Representation. Journal of Politics, 58, 91–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gray, V., Lowery, D., Harden, J., & Cluverius, J. (2013). Explaining the Anomalous Growth of Public Sector Lobbying in the American States, 1997–2007. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 4, 580–599.Google Scholar
  17. Guinier, L. (1994). The Tyranny of the Majority. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  18. Heaney, M. T. (2004). Issue Networks, Information, and Interest Group Alliances: The Case of Wisconsin Welfare Politics, 1993–99. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 4, 237–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heberlig, E. S. (2005). Getting to Know You and Getting Your Vote: Lobbyists’ Uncertainty and the Contacting of Legislators. Political Research Quarterly, 58, 511–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hershey, M. (2009). What We Know About Voter-ID Laws, Registration, and Turnout. PS: Political Science and Politics, 42(1), 87–91.Google Scholar
  21. Hojnacki, M. (1997). Interest Groups’ Decisions to Join Alliances or Work Alone. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 61–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hojnacki, M., & Kimball, D. (1998). Organized Interests and the Decision of Whom to Lobby in Congress. American Political Science Review, 92, 775–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Holyoke, T. (2003). Choosing Battlegrounds: Interest Group Lobbying Across Multiple Venues. Political Research Quarterly, 56, 325–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Htun, M., & Ossa, J. P. (2013). Political Inclusion of Marginalized Groups: Indigenous Reservations and Gender Parity in Bolivia. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 1(1), 4–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klüver, H. (2010). Europeanization of Lobbying Activities: When National Interest Groups Spill Over to the European Level. Journal of European Integration, 32(2), 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kurtz, S. (2002). Workplace Justice: Organizing Multi-Identity Movements. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  27. Marchetti, K. (2014). Crossing the Intersection: The Representation of Disadvantaged Identities in Advocacy. Politics, Groups and Identities, 2, 104–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marchetti, K. (2015). The Use of Surveys in Interest Group Research. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 4(3), 272–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meyer, D., & Imig, D. (1993). Political Opportunity and the Rise and Decline of Interest Group Sectors. Social Science Journal, 30, 253–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Meyer, D., & Staggenborg, S. (2012). Thinking About Strategy. In G. Maney, R. Kurtz-Flamenbaum, D. Rohlinger, & J. Goodwin (Eds.), Strategies for Social Change (pp. 3–22). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Miller, L. L. (2008). The Perils of Federalism: Poor People and the Politics of Crime Control. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Minkoff, D. (1997). Organizational Mobilizations, Institutional Access, and Institutional Change. In C. Cohen, K. Jones, & J. Tronto (Eds.), Women Transforming Politics (pp. 477–498). New York, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Poggione, S. (2004). Exploring Gender Differences in State Legislators’ Policy Preferences. Political Research Quarterly, 57, 305–314.Google Scholar
  34. Reingold, B. (2008). Women as Officeholders: Linking Descriptive and Substantive Representation. In C. Wolbrecht, K. Beckwith, & L. Baldez (Eds.), Political Women and American Democracy (pp. 128–147). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rolandsen Agustin, L. (2013). Gender Equality, Intersectionality, and Diversity in Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Smooth, W. (2011). Standing for Women? Which Women? The Substantive Representation of Women’s Interests and the Research Imperative of Intersectionality. Politics & Gender, 7(3), 436–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Staggenborg, S. (1995). Can Feminist Organizations Be Effective? In M. M. Ferree & P. Y. Martin (Eds.), Feminist Organizations: Harvest of the New Women’s Movement (pp. 339–355). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Strolovitch, D. (2007). Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Swers, M. (2002). The Difference Women Make. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  40. Tungohan, E. (2016). Intersectionality and Social Justice: Assessing Activists’ Use of Intersectionality Through Grassroots Migrants’ Organizations in Canada. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 4(3), 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., Brady, H., & Nie, N. H. (1993). Race, Ethnicity and Political Resources: Participation in the United States. British Journal of Political Science, 23(4), 453–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Verloo, M. (2006). Multiple Inequalities, Intersectionality and the European Union. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13(3), 211–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Victor, J. N. (2007). Strategic Lobbying: Demonstrating How Legislative Context Affects Interest Groups’ Lobbying Tactics. American Politics Research, 35, 826–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Walsh, S. D., & Xydias, C. (2014). Women’s Organizing and Intersectional Policy-Making in Comparative Perspective: Evidence from Guatemala and Germany. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 2(4), 549–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Young, I. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Zippel, K. (2004). Transnational Advocacy Networks and Policy Cycles in the European Union: The Case of Sexual Harassment. Social Politics, 11(1), 57–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceDickinson CollegeCarlisleUSA

Personalised recommendations