Determinants of Electoral Support for Anti-Gay Marriage Constitutional Amendments: An Examination of Ballot Issues in California and Florida

Abstract

Between 1998 and2006, twenty-seven states amended their constitutions to prohibit same sex marriage. The 2008 elections again saw three states with ballot measures aimed at banning gay marriage. This study examines the determinants of support for those measures in California and Florida, and includes a similar measure placed on the primary election ballot in California in 2000. Support is measured as the county-wide vote in favor of each gay marriage ban. A number of hypotheses are explored that examine the urban/rural nature of each county, as well as the political and demographic characteristics of county residents. It is suggested that states may be best viewed as relatively independent groupings of diverse subcultures, rather than as homogenous populations with a single political culture. The findings reported here indicate that a host of demographic, political and religious differences within each state influence residents' votes on gay marriage bans.

Examining the Nuance in Public Opinion of Pro-LGB Policies in a “Red State”

“…With regard to public opinion, Salka and Burnett (2011) found that the urban-rural divide did not significantly predict support for same-sex marriage in Florida's election in 2008. Further, demographic differences between those who live in rural versus urban areas are important to consider.…”

“…Fiorina et al (2006), for example, showed that public opinion of social issues was divided closely instead of deeply and showed that even in the socalled blue states, public opinion was mostly unsupportive of pro-LGB policies in 2004. Some scholars further argue that the narrative blankets states into homogenous political cultures, which may be inaccurate and inadequate for understanding public opinion of LGB policies at the state and local levels, where much of the policymaking related to LGB issues takes place (Salka and Burnett 2011).…”

“…This frame posits that urban areas are more tolerant and welcoming for LGB people and that urbanites are more supportive of pro-LGB policies and accepting of homosexuality (Swank et al 2013;Salka and Burnett 2011;Carter 2008;Carter and Borch 2005;Eldridge et al 2006;Snively et al 2004;Wilson 1985;Fischer 1975). Some research supports these claims in that levels of homophobia tend to be higher in rural areas and LGB people from rural areas tend to report more discrimination than urban LGB people, including job discrimination, verbal threats, and property damage (Eldridge et al 2006;Snively et al 2004;Swank et al 2013).…”

“…The redblue state narrative assumes people in states that tend to support Republican presidential candidates (red states) oppose pro-LGB policies (Hunter 1991;Pew Research 2014b;Rauch 2014;Saad 2013), and the urban-rural narrative similarly portrays that rural areas are unsupportive of pro-LGB policies (Eldridge et al 2006;Snively et al 2004;Swank et al 2013;Swank et al 2012). Yet some scholars question the accuracy of these narratives (Fiorina et al 2006(Fiorina et al , 2008Salka and Burnett 2011). Studies, for example, show that rural LGB people report feeling accepted and connected to their communities (Kazyak 2011(Kazyak , 2012Oswald and Lazarevic 2011;Wienke and Hill 2013), suggesting that these narratives might mask a complex and nuanced public opinion of pro-LGB policies.…”

The Evolution of Attitudes on Same-Sex Marriage in California and the U.S.

“…Across the literature, gender, age, religious affiliation, religious intensity, education, income, marital status, ethnicity, and contact with gay people have all been suggested as significant sources of variation in attitudes on gay rights issues. In most studies, males, older respondents, Protestants, Catholics, those with greater church attendance, those with less education, lower-income respondents, African Americans, Latinos, married respondents, those from rural areas, Southerners, and those with limited contact with gays and lesbians all demonstrated lower support for same-sex marriage and were more likely to vote for bans (Barth, et al 2009;Baunach 2012;Becker 2012aBecker , 2012bBecker and Scheufele 2009;Brewer 2008;Brumbaugh, et al 2008;Burnett and Salka 2009;Dyck and Pearson-Merkowitz 2012;Egan and Sherrill, 2009;Fleischmann and Moyer 2009;Gaines and Garand 2010;Lewis and Gossett 2008;McKenzie and Rouse 2013;McVeigh and Diaz 2009;Olson et al 2006;Salka and Burnett 2012;Sherkat et al 2010;Sherkat et al 2011). Several of these studies report inconsistent results for some variables including gender, age, income, ethnicity, and marital status.…”