| Popis: |
The narrative policy framework (NPF) provides a structure for examining the impact of policy narratives on policy change (Jones and McBeth 2010). At the meso level, policy process scholars, including NPF research, tend to focus on legislative and agency-level case studies; direct democracy decisions are an understudied area in our sub-discipline. Direct democracy provides an important venue for policy making by a public who is growing increasingly dissatisfied with our politicians and political institutions. How “We the People” make policy often frustrates our elected officials but emboldens citizens and bolsters participation—cornerstones in a well-functioning democracy. At the heart of politics are policy narratives or stories, and how “We the People” tell stories and use narratives to frame our policy preferences is fundamental to their success. But to date, despite the centrality of narratives in democracy, no meso-level NPF research examines the role of policy narratives in direct democracy debates or connects these narratives to specific outcomes. This research fills that niche through the use of NPF to understand the policy outcome of Ohio voter referendum, Issue 2, which asked voters to maintain or repeal Senate Bill 5 (SB5), a 2011 state law restricting the collective bargaining rights of public sector workers. Using NPF narrative components to analyze media policy narratives, we compare these results to elite interviews, public opinion data, voter registration, and voting results by county to determine effective narratives and help understand why Ohio voters rejected SB5 in a referendum (Issue 2). |
