Date of Award

2025

Document Type

Honors Thesis (Open Access)

Department

Colby College. Government Dept.

Advisor(s)

Nicholas Jacobs

Second Advisor

Carrie LeVan

Abstract

Since the return of abortion policy to the states following Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), sixteen states have considered ballot measures addressing core questions of abortion access. Distinct from pre-2022 initiatives, these recent measures present binary choices on issues such as viability-based access, six-week bans, and the existence or repudiation of a right to abortion in state constitutions. Although existing scholarship generally frames initiatives and referendums as mechanisms that enhance congruence between public opinion and policy outcomes, this focus overlooks the broader effects of direct democratic processes on voters. I hypothesize that there is something unique in the political environment created by initiatives and referendums on abortion policy that is inadequately captured by the existing scholarly emphasis on congruence. Using three experiments to approximate the political environment created during the initiative and referendum process, this research anticipates that the environmental and structural forces inherent in the initiative and referendum process shift voter opinion and mobilize voters. The findings from these three experiments suggest that the conventional emphasis on congruence may inadequately assess ballot measures, but that hypothesized fears of direct democracy functioning as a polarizing mechanism did not materialize. This research contributes a critical perspective to ongoing discussions on the role of direct democracy in American policymaking and offers insight into the evolving dynamics of abortion policy in the post-Dobbs landscape.

Keywords

abortion, initiative, referendum, direct democracy, congruence, public opinion

Download

Share

COinS