Songs for Social Justice and Advocacy

Edwards, Charles P.

doi:10.4324/9781315180687-28

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Coalition work, which minimizes lobbying costs while expanding organizational reach, provides them with a chance to lobby both more effectively and equitably. For instance, social and economic justice organizations are significantly more likely to bear influence over policy outcomes when lobbying collaboratively; they are also significantly more likely to pursue intersectional advocacy—advocacy on behalf of multiply disadvantaged constituents—under conditions of collaboration (Dwidar, 2022a, 2022b, 2023).…”

Section: Theoretical Foundations and Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But despite these obstacles, Native interests often leverage coalition strategy in partnership with other tribes, Native organizations, and allied advocates (Dwidar, 2023). Moreover, these intertribal partnerships have been speculated to be “vital” for solving critical Native political and policy challenges (Bang et al, 2018).…”

Section: Theoretical Foundations and Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tribal coalitions and lobbying outcomes: Evidence from administrative rulemaking

Dwidar

Marchetti

2023

Pres Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

American Indians are among the most underrepresented, yet heavily regulated, groups in national politics. While Indian nations maintain statuses as sovereign nations, they, and their people, remain affected by national policies addressing their treaty, land, resource, and civil and political rights. Theories of American Indian political incorporation suggest that Indian nations thus deploy interest group tactics to maintain or achieve favorable policy outcomes. We argue that coalition building, a ubiquitous lobbying strategy, enhances tribal policy advocacy and that “Native‐dominant” coalitions—those in which Native interests constitute a majority of members—are more influential than their non‐Native‐dominant counterparts. We test these claims using data from administrative rulemaking and find support for our hypotheses. We conclude that the unique particularities of tribal advocacy distinguish Native coalitions from those of other groups, and that their strategic lobbying choices may help to mediate representational disparities in policymaking by the executive branch.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Foundations and Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Foundations and Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%