A topic to which students of higher education politics and public policy have paid no attention is the resurgent direct democracy movement in the American states. This article seeks to clarify the nature and scope of the statewide ballot phenomenon as it affects the higher education policy domain. The article embeds the issue of higher education balloting in historical context by examining the conceptual origins and contemporary debate surrounding the direct democracy movement in the United States. The article then defines the boundaries of higher education ballot activity by analyzing ballot trends affecting higher education over the past decade. Results reveal that although voters recently have decided a range of important campus governance questions, the two most significant areas of ballot activity over the past decade involve money and morality. The authors explore a variety of theoretical implications of the research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Association of Governing Boards
. (1998). Bridging the gap between state government and higher education. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
Baumgartner, F.
, & Jones, B. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
Beck, P. A.
(1986). Choice, context, and consequence: Beaten and unbeaten paths toward a science of electoral behavior. In H. Weisberg, (Ed.). Political science: The science of politics. New York: Agathon Press.
4.
Bery, F S.
, & Berry, W. D. (1999). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In P. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview.
5.
Berry, J.
(1977). Lobbying for the people. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
Bowler, S.
, Donovan, T., & Tolbert, C. (1998). Citizens as legislators: Direct democracy in the United States. Columbus: Ohio State Press.
7.
Browne, W. P.
(1995). Cultivating Congress: Constituents, issues, and agricultural policymaking. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
8.
Campbell, A.
, Converse, P., Miller, W., & Stokes, D. (1960). The American voter. New York: John Wiley.
9.
Chronicle of Higher Education
. (1993-2000). Referenda affecting higher education.
10.
Cook, C. E.
(1998). Lobbying for higher education. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
11.
Cronin, T.
(1989). Direct democracy: The politics of initiative, referendum, and recall. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
Crosson, P.
(1984). State postsecondary education policy systems. The Review of Higher Education, 7(2), 125-142.
13.
De Give, M.
, & Olswang, S. (1999). The making of a branch campus system: A statewide strategy of coalition building. Review of Higher Education, 22(3), 287-313.
14.
Dubois, P.
, & Feeney, F. (1998). Lawmaking by initiative. New York: Agathon Press.
15.
Gamble, B.
(1997). Putting civil rights to a popular vote. American Journal of Political Science, 41(1), 245-269.
16.
Gerber, E.
(1996). Legislative response to the threat of popular initiatives. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 99-128.
17.
Gerber, E.
(1999). The populist paradox: Interest group influence and the promise of direct legislation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18.
Gittell, M.
, & Kleiman, N. S. (2000). The political context of higher education. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(7), 1058-1091.
19.
Goodall, L.
(1987). When colleges lobby states. Washington, DC: American Association of State Colleges and Universities.
20.
Gormley, W. T.
(1986). Regulatory issue networks in a federal system. Polity, 18, 595-620.
21.
Gray, V.
(1994). Competition, emulation, and policy innovation. In L. C. Dodd & C. Jillson (Ed.), New perspectives on american politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
22.
Gray, V.
(1973). Innovation in the states: A diffusion study. American Political Science Review, 67(4), 1174-1185.
23.
Gray, V.
, & Lowery, D. (1996). The population ecology of interest group representation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
24.
Haider-Markel, D.
, & Meier, K. (1996). The politics of gay and lesbian rights: Expanding the scope of the conflict. Journal of Politics, 58(2), 332-349.
25.
Healy, P.
(1996, October 11). The making of a Michigan regent. Chronicle off Higher Education.
26.
Hearn, J. C.
, & Griswold, C. (1994). State-level centralization and policy innovation in U.S. postsecondary education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 16(2), 161-190.
27.
Hebel, S.
(1999, February 12). Governors are making college issues prominent in 1999 legislative sessions. Chronicle of Higher Education.
28.
Heller, D.
(in press). The policy shift in state financial aid programs. In J. Small (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Volume XVII). New York: Agathon.
29.
Hines, E.
(1988). State governments and higher education. Washington, DC: ASHE-ERIC.
30.
Hrebenar, R.
(1997). Interest group politics in America. Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
31.
Kingdon, J. W.
(1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York: HarperCollins.
32.
Lascher, E. L.
, Hagen, M., & Rochlin, S. (1996). Ballot initiatives, state policies and public opinion. Journal of Politics, 58(3), 760-775.
33.
Lederman, D.
(1997, April 18). Political action committees help lawmakers who help colleges. Chronicle of Higher Education.
34.
Lowi, T.
(1969). The end of liberalism. New York: Norton.
35.
Magleby, D. B.
(1984). Direct legislation: Voting on ballot propositions in the United States. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
36.
Marcus, L.
(1997). Restructuring state level higher education governance patterns. Review of Higher Education, 20(4), 399-418.
37.
McLendon, M. K.
(2000, September 1). Setting the governmental agenda for state decentralization of higher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
38.
McLendon, M. K.
(in press). State governance reform of higher education: Patterns, trends, and theories of the policy process. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. XVIII). New York: Agathon Press.
39.
McLendon, M. K.
, & Eddings, S. (2001). The politics of higher education balloting in the states. Unpublished manuscript, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
40.
McLendon, M. K.
, Heller, D., & Young, S. (2001, April 17). State postsecondary policy innovation: Politics, competition, and interstate migration of policy ideas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
41.
Meier, K. J.
(1994). The politics of sin: Drugs, alcohol, and public policy. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
42.
Mercer, J.
(1992, September 16). Oregon proposal would require academe to fight homosexuality. Chronicle of Higher Education.
43.
Miller, C.
(2001, May 15). Graham's amendment may include trustees. The Gainesville Sun.
44.
Mintrom, M.
(1997). Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 738-770.
45.
Mooney, C.
, & Lee, M. (1995). Legislative morality in the American states. American Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 599-627.
46.
National Conference of State Legislatures
. (1994-2000). Ballot questions certified. Denver: Author.
47.
Nownes, A.
, & Freeman, P. (1998). Interest group activity in the states. Journal of Politics, 60, 86-112.
48.
Pusser, B.
(2001). The contemporary politics of access policy: California after Proposition 209. In D. Heller (Ed.), The states and public higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
49.
Ripley, R.
, & Franklin, G. (1991). Congress, the bureaucracy, andpublic policy (5th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
50.
Rockman, B.
(1994). The new institutionalism and the old institutions. In L. C. Dodd & C. Jillson (Ed.), New perspectives on American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
51.
Rosenthal, A.
(1998). Th7e decline of representative democracy. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
52.
Schrag, P.
(1999). Paradise lost: California's experience, America's future. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
53.
Selingo, J.
(2001, May 11). Florida moves to scrap Board of Regents in favor of local control of universities. Chronicle of Higher Education, A30-A32.
54.
Selingo, J.
(1999, October 8). As Alabama lottery campaign heats up, colleges maneuver for best position. Chronicle of Higher Education.
55.
Terenzini, P.
(1996). Rediscovering roots: Public policy and higher education research. Review of Higher Education, 20(1), 5-13.
56.
Trombly, W.
(2001). Florida's new "K-20" model. Crosstalk, 9(2), 1, 14-16.
57.
Truman, D.
(1951). The governmental process. New York: Knopf.
58.
Van Der Slik, J.
(1999, April 17). Beyond incrementalism: Changing higher education governance in Illinois. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
59.
Walker, J. W.
(1969). The diffusion of innovations among the American states. American Political Science Review, 63(3), 880-899.
60.
Walker, J. W.
(1991). Mobilizing interest groups in America. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
61.
Weber, R.
(1985). Basic content analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
