Why State Constitutions Differ in their Treatment of Same-Sex Marriage

This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data

Why State Constitutions Differ in their Treatment of Same-Sex Marriage

Author Info

Lupia, Arthur
Krupnikov, Yanna
Levine, Adam Seth
Piston, Spencer
Von Hagen-Jamae, Alexander

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Arthur Lupia

Abstract

Some states treat a same-sex marriage as legally equal to a marriage between a man and a woman. Other states prohibit legal recognition of same-sex marriages in their constitutions. In every state that has a constitutional restriction against same-sex marriage, the amendment was passed by a popular vote. The conventional wisdom about allowing voter participation in such decisions is that they yield constitutional outcomes that reflect attitude differences across states. We reexamine the attitude-amendment relationship and find it to be weaker than expected. In particular, we show that states vary in the costs they impose on constituencies that desire constitutional change. Some states impose very low costs (i.e., a simple majority of voters is sufficient for change). Other states impose very high costs (i.e., substantial legislative and voter supermajoriries are requires). We find that variations in the legal status of same-sex marriage across US states is better explained by these variations in costs than they are by differences in public opinion. Our method yields an improved explanation of why states differ in their constitutional treatment of same-sex marriage today. Our findings have distinct implications for people who wish to understand and/or change the future status of same-sex couples in state constitutions.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 15096.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 23 Apr 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:15096

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H70 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - General
K0 - Law and Economics - - General
H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

NEP-ALL-2009-05-16 (All new papers)
NEP-POL-2009-05-16 (Positive Political Economics)

This item is featured on the following reading lists:

Economic Logic blog

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Did you know? Over 1000 institutions contribute their bibliographic data directly to this service.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-26.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.