WEDGE ISSUES AND INITIATIVE POLITICS Thad Kousser

Race as a Political Issue  Wedge Issues  Definition  Examples of famous initiatives  Short-Term Gain, Long-Term Loss?  Effects of Prop. 187 on Latino participation  Effects of Prop. 187 on Republican Party fortunes

The End of the Rainbow: Wedge Issues and Their Backlash  A wedge issue is “used by candidates of one party to attract voters who usually support the other party – in effect, driving a wedge between the opposition and its normal supporters.”  A wedge can split the other party, a minority group, or a group coalition.

What Makes a Wedge Work?  Present voters with a salient issue, big enough to motivate their candidate choice  Give voters a clear choice between candidates who take different sides on the wedge issue  Voters might have opinions on the issue, but not a strong enough opinion to choose a candidate  All candidates are on one side, effectively taking the wedge off the table Successful WedgesUnsuccessful Wedges

The End of the Rainbow: Wedge Issues and Their Backlash  Passed by a 59-41% margin in 1994, Prop. 187 would have prevented state and local governments from providing social services, education, and non-emergency medical care to illegal immigrants.  It fueled Pete Wilson’s dramatic comeback, with 36% of Democrats supporting it and 19% of Dems supporting Wilson over Kathleen Brown.  Opposition to 187 was highest among Latinos (77%), Jews (55%), and blacks and Asians (53%).

The End of the Rainbow: Wedge Issues and Their Backlash  Passed by a 55%-45% margin in 1996, Prop. 209 ended gender and race preferences by state and local governments, in fields such as public universities, public employment, and government contracts.  Favored 51-36% by whites, opposed 57-27% by Latinos, opposed 66-18% by blacks, and opposed 53%-31% by Asians.  It failed to help Bob Dole as a wedge issue, because Democratic voters did not care about it enough to switch from Bill Clinton to Bob Dole.

The New Rainbow Politics: Gay Rights As A Wedge Issue  In November 2008, Proposition 8, “The California Marriage Protection Act,” placed a ban on same- sex marriage into the state constitution by a 52%- 48% margin. A national exit poll reported:  49% support by white voters  70% support by African-American voters  53% support by Latinos  49% support by Asian-Americans

Political Geography of Prop. 8

The New Rainbow Politics: Gay Rights As A Wedge Issue  Partisan Wedge? Barack Obama straddled the issue, personally supporting only civil unions but opposing divisive campaigns to constitutionalize the debate  36% of Democrats supported Prop. 8  82% of Republicans (and McCain) supported  Generational Split:  36% of those aged supported Prop. 8  61% of those aged 65 or over supported it

An Opinion Transformation…

… and the Divides that Remain

Long-Term Impact of Prop. 187: From Purple to Blue?  Since the Prop. 187 campaign, Latino voters have been energized Democrats.  The number of new citizens in the state jumped from 178,000 in to 515,000 in  In 1996, 67% of newly registered Latinos voted, up from 43% in  Latinos voted 73-21% Democratic in 1996, after voting 52%-40% Dem in 1992.

Long-Term Impact of Prop. 187: From Purple to Blue?  (48 years x 2 senators = 96 senator years)  Republicans: 54 years  Democrats: 42 years  (16 years x 2 senators = 32 senator years)  Republicans: 0  Democrats: 32 California Senators: 1944–1992 California Senators: 1992–2008

Fiorina and Abrams: “Latino Electoral Importance is Growing”

Fiorina and Abrams: “But Not As Much As Often Assumed”

Discussion Questions  Was Pete Wilson framed, as Fiorina and Abrams argue, or did Prop. 187 really doom future Republican prospects in the state?  Are generational demographics destiny for same- sex marriage issues, meaning that support will inevitably rise as your generation gets older, or not?