The Politics of Gay Rights in American Communities: Explaining Antidiscrimination Ordinances and Policies

Wald, Kenneth D.; Button, James W.; Rienzo, Barbara A.

doi:10.2307/2111746

Cited by 131 publications

(226 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

219

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on local LGBT rights laws employs an "urbanism/ social diversity model" to examine the forces that spur cities to adopt such policies (Wald, Button, and Rienzo 1996). Cities with higher education levels, greater diversity, and more people engaged in management, business, science, and arts occupations increase the likelihood of passage of LGBT employment nondiscrimination laws (Taylor et al 2014).…”

Section: State Institutional and Legal Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Home Rule Be Damned: Exploring Policy Conflicts between the Statehouse and City Hall

Hicks

Weissert

Swanson

et al. 2017

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: State Institutional and Legal Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Home Rule Be Damned: Exploring Policy Conflicts between the Statehouse and City Hall

Hicks

Weissert

Swanson

et al. 2017

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We use 2000 Census data to obtain a measure of the mean years of education for county residents age 25 and older. Above and beyond the effects of education, many college campuses provide contexts conducive to gay rights activism and more tolerant views about homosexuality (Wald, Button, and Rienzo 1996). To capture this "college town" effect, we include a measure of the percentage of county residents age 3 years and older who are currently enrolled in college.…”

Section: Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Soule (2004) demonstrates, activist organizations can influence public policy on issues such as same-sex marriage (see also Burstein 1991;McVeigh, Welch, and Bjarnason 2003;Wald et al 1996;Werum and Winders 2001). Soule's analysis uses state-level measures of the presence or absence of interest groups involved in the same-sex marriage debate.…”

Section: Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voting to Ban Same-Sex Marriage: Interests, Values, and Communities

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From 2000 through 2008, initiatives proposing to ban same-sex marriage were on the ballot in 28 states. Although same-sex marriage opponents scored lopsided victories in most cases, voting outcomes varied substantially at the county level. This article examines sources of that variation and argues that opposition to same-sex marriage should be strong in communities characterized by the predominance of traditional gender roles and family structure. Perhaps more interestingly, the analysis also shows that the effects of traditional family structure and gender roles are especially strong in counties characterized by weak community cohesion, as indicated by residential instability, low rates of home ownership, and high crime rates.

show abstract

“…Potential Constituency is expected to be positively related to membership levels in gay and lesbian interest groups. While this measure counts only those homosexuals in a relationship, living with a partner, and willing to admit it, the measure has clear face validity and is the best available measure of gay and lesbian population (see Haider-Markel and Meier n.d.; Wald, Button, andRienzo 1996, 1170).…”

Section: Dependent Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interest Group Survival: Shared Interests Versus Competition for Resources

Haider‐Markel¹

1997

The Journal of Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SURVIVING AS AN ORGANIZED INTERESTIn order to survive, an organization must effectively exploit the resources in its environment. Because many organizations are dependent on the same resources as other, similar, organizations, they must find a way to share resources or eliminate other organizations through competition. In the case of interest groups working toward the same goal or collective good, however, competition seems illogical. How do interest groups resolve this conflict between selfpreservation and the achievement of a collective good? Lowery and Gray (1995) provide at least part of the answer in their analysis of interest groups at the aggregate level. They draw on biological concepts from population ecology theory to explain the number of groups within specific issue areas, but they do not use the theory to explain how or why membership levels in a group might vary across political jurisdictions. Because population ecology theory outlines the nature of an ecosystem where groups within an issue area must struggle for resources and members to survive, the purpose here is to test the implications of the theory for the membership levels of interest groups within an issue area. I review population ecology theory and other literature addressing

show abstract

The Politics of Gay Rights in American Communities: Explaining Antidiscrimination Ordinances and Policies

Cited by 131 publications

References 37 publications

Home Rule Be Damned: Exploring Policy Conflicts between the Statehouse and City Hall

Home Rule Be Damned: Exploring Policy Conflicts between the Statehouse and City Hall

Voting to Ban Same-Sex Marriage: Interests, Values, and Communities

Interest Group Survival: Shared Interests Versus Competition for Resources

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About