All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Gay and Lesbian Rights as a "Mini" Issue Evolution
Unformatted Document Text:  Over the past fifteen years, cultural issues have claimed an increasing share of the policy agenda in Washington and many state capitals. Casual observation suggests that issues such as abortion, gay rights and gun control are almost obsessively covered in American newspapers, radio programs and television news. In addition, legislators and other political elites are increasingly polarized on cultural policy issues across party lines: Democratic elites are increasingly pro- choice, pro-gay rights and in favor of gun control, while Republican elites increasingly take stronger positions against each of these (Adams 1997; Lindaman and Haider-Markel 2002; Fiorina 2005). These observations lead many to conclude that a “culture war” has erupted in American politics: that cultural policy issues not only dominate the policy agenda and divide political elites, but also reflect significant differences in opinion in the electorate. But what remains unclear is whether the mass public is in fact strongly divided on cultural policy issues. White (2003) argues that increasing heterogeneity in ethnicity and family structure in the United States has created heterogeneity in policy preferences on cultural issues. The result at the elite level is increasing cultural policy conflict. Fiorina (2005), however, demonstrates that public opinion on cultural policy issues tends to be far more moderate and less polarized than is suggested by media accounts of a culture war. The question of whether and how the mass public is divided on cultural policy issues is significant for political scientists for both normative and positive reasons. The normative question at stake is whether a policy agenda and media focus dominated by cultural issues serves the interests of the electorate. If little mass conflict exists on these issues, then it is likely the electorate would be better served by more attention on issues of higher salience and higher mass conflict. The positive question at hand concerns the make-up of the political parties at the mass 2

Authors: Craw, Michael.
first   previous   Page 2 of 21   next   last



background image
Over the past fifteen years, cultural issues have claimed an increasing share of the policy agenda
in Washington and many state capitals. Casual observation suggests that issues such as abortion,
gay rights and gun control are almost obsessively covered in American newspapers, radio
programs and television news. In addition, legislators and other political elites are increasingly
polarized on cultural policy issues across party lines: Democratic elites are increasingly pro-
choice, pro-gay rights and in favor of gun control, while Republican elites increasingly take
stronger positions against each of these (Adams 1997; Lindaman and Haider-Markel 2002;
Fiorina 2005). These observations lead many to conclude that a “culture war” has erupted in
American politics: that cultural policy issues not only dominate the policy agenda and divide
political elites, but also reflect significant differences in opinion in the electorate.
But what remains unclear is whether the mass public is in fact strongly divided on cultural policy
issues. White (2003) argues that increasing heterogeneity in ethnicity and family structure in the
United States has created heterogeneity in policy preferences on cultural issues. The result at the
elite level is increasing cultural policy conflict. Fiorina (2005), however, demonstrates that
public opinion on cultural policy issues tends to be far more moderate and less polarized than is
suggested by media accounts of a culture war.
The question of whether and how the mass public is divided on cultural policy issues is
significant for political scientists for both normative and positive reasons. The normative
question at stake is whether a policy agenda and media focus dominated by cultural issues serves
the interests of the electorate. If little mass conflict exists on these issues, then it is likely the
electorate would be better served by more attention on issues of higher salience and higher mass
conflict. The positive question at hand concerns the make-up of the political parties at the mass
2


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 2 of 21   next   last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.