Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Introduction: Bringing Intersectionality to Public Policy Read chapter Read first chapter

2019 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

20. Intersectional Advocacy and Policymaking Across US States

Author : Kathleen Marchetti

Published in: The Palgrave Handbook of Intersectionality in Public Policy

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

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.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Intersectional Analysis of Age in the Context of Rural Health Policy in Ukraine
next chapter Bringing Intersectionality into Danish Public Policy
Footnotes
1
Within this project, social justice organizations are defined as those focused on bringing about a more equitable distribution of resources and opportunities for individuals typically marginalized or disadvantaged by and within mainstream institutional practices and structures.
 
2
Though this framework and many of the examples cited in this section focus on the US context, research on intra- and international organizations in a variety of non-US countries demonstrates connections between political context and organizational behaviour. In addition to those cited here, some of this research is summarized in Marchetti’s (2015) review of the use of surveys in interest group research and has been published in Interest Groups & Advocacy, Comparative Political Studies, and the Journal of European Public Policy (among others).
 
3
The 14 states are Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Washington, and Wisconsin.
 
4
Coding of private and advocacy groups based on Gray et al. (2013).
 
5
The models were estimated using multi-level Poisson and multi-level ordinary least squares regressions, respectively. The multi-level approach accounts for the clusters of organizations at the state level with the organization specified as level 1, the state specified as level 2. The Poisson model is appropriate for a dependent variable that is a count, while the ordinary least squares regression is used for the continuous proportional measure. Coefficients for model 1 are expressed as incidence rate ratios (IRR) for ease of interpretation and can be understood in the following way: an IRR above 1.0 represents a positive change in the dependent variable, while an IRR below 1.0 represents a negative change in the dependent variable.
 
6
The measure of meeting with legislators ranges from zero to four, with zero indicating that the group never meets with legislators and four indicating that the organization meets with legislators on a weekly to daily basis.
 
7
Bill movement was measured on a five-point numerical scale: 0 = a bill had not been introduced, 1 = a bill was introduced but died in committee in the legislative body in which it was proposed, 2 = a bill was passed by one legislative body (either the House or Senate) but died after moving to the second legislative body, 3 = a bill was passed by both legislative bodies (the House and Senate) but was not signed into law or vetoed by the governor, and 4 = a bill was passed by both the House and Senate and was signed into law by the governor.
 
8
Adam, Karla. “Worldwide, people rally in support of Women’s March on Washington.” Washington Post 21January 2017.
 
Literature
Berger, M. T. (2004). Workable Sisterhood: The Political Journey of Women Stigmatized Women with HIV/AIDS. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Berry, J. (1977). Lobbying for the People: The Political Behavior of Public Interest Groups. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
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.
Beyers, J., & Kerremans, B. (2007). Critical Resource Dependencies and the Europeanization of Domestic Interest Groups. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(3), 460–481.CrossRef
Brown, N. (2014). Sisters in the Statehouse: Black Women & Legislative Decision Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Browne, W. P. (1990). Organized Interests and Their Issue Niches: A Search for Pluralism in a Policy Domain. Journal of Politics, 52, 477–509.CrossRef
Carbado, D. W. (2013). Colorblind Intersectionality. Signs Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(4), 811–845.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
Cohen, C. J. (1999). The Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299.CrossRef
Dill, B. T. (1983). Race, Class, and Gender: Prospects for an All-Inclusive Sisterhood. Feminist Studies, 9, 131–149.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
Fredman, S. (2005). Double Trouble: Multiple Discrimination and EU Law. European Anti-Discrimination Law Review, 2, 13–21.
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.
Gray, V., & Lowery, D. (1996). A Niche Theory of Interest Representation. Journal of Politics, 58, 91–111.CrossRef
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.
Guinier, L. (1994). The Tyranny of the Majority. New York: Free Press.
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
Hershey, M. (2009). What We Know About Voter-ID Laws, Registration, and Turnout. PS: Political Science and Politics, 42(1), 87–91.
Hojnacki, M. (1997). Interest Groups’ Decisions to Join Alliances or Work Alone. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 61–87.CrossRef
Hojnacki, M., & Kimball, D. (1998). Organized Interests and the Decision of Whom to Lobby in Congress. American Political Science Review, 92, 775–790.CrossRef
Holyoke, T. (2003). Choosing Battlegrounds: Interest Group Lobbying Across Multiple Venues. Political Research Quarterly, 56, 325–336.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
Kurtz, S. (2002). Workplace Justice: Organizing Multi-Identity Movements. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Marchetti, K. (2014). Crossing the Intersection: The Representation of Disadvantaged Identities in Advocacy. Politics, Groups and Identities, 2, 104–119.CrossRef
Marchetti, K. (2015). The Use of Surveys in Interest Group Research. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 4(3), 272–282.CrossRef
Meyer, D., & Imig, D. (1993). Political Opportunity and the Rise and Decline of Interest Group Sectors. Social Science Journal, 30, 253–271.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
Miller, L. L. (2008). The Perils of Federalism: Poor People and the Politics of Crime Control. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
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.
Poggione, S. (2004). Exploring Gender Differences in State Legislators’ Policy Preferences. Political Research Quarterly, 57, 305–314.
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.CrossRef
Rolandsen Agustin, L. (2013). Gender Equality, Intersectionality, and Diversity in Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.
Strolovitch, D. (2007). Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef
Swers, M. (2002). The Difference Women Make. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
Verloo, M. (2006). Multiple Inequalities, Intersectionality and the European Union. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13(3), 211–228.CrossRef
Victor, J. N. (2007). Strategic Lobbying: Demonstrating How Legislative Context Affects Interest Groups’ Lobbying Tactics. American Politics Research, 35, 826–845.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
Young, I. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Zippel, K. (2004). Transnational Advocacy Networks and Policy Cycles in the European Union: The Case of Sexual Harassment. Social Politics, 11(1), 57–85.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Intersectional Advocacy and Policymaking Across US States
Author
Kathleen Marchetti
Copyright Year
2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Book
The Palgrave Handbook of Intersectionality in Public Policy

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98472-8

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-98473-5

Copyright Year: 2019

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98473-5_20