Editorial Type:
Article Category: Research Article
 | 
Online Publication Date: 01 Jul 2016

Social Movements, Strategic Choice, and Recourse to the Polls*

Page Range: 177 – 192
DOI: 10.17813/1086-671X-21-2-177
Save
Download PDF

In 2011, twenty-one state legislatures held floor votes on one or more bills seeking to limit teachers' collective bargaining rights, tenure protections, or both. In eighteen states, these bills became law. Teachers' unions took varying approaches to fighting against these pieces of legislation, but only in a few states did they turn to the ballot box, despite widespread availability of electoral tactics. In this study, I use fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to determine why most teachers' unions did not turn to the ballot. I find two causal “pathways”: one in which political opportunity structures and union strength make legislative compromise possible, and another in which these conditions, along with the nature of the legislative threat, make success at the ballot seem unlikely. Social movement scholars must reexamine the role that threat plays in strategic choice processes, and prospect theory can help make sense of these choices.

Copyright: © 2016 Hank Johnston DBA Mobilization Journal 2016

Contributor Notes

* An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2014 ASA annual meeting. Parts of this research were supported through generous funding from the National Science Foundation (SES-1303680) and the UCLA Institute for Research on Labor and Employment. I thank David Meyer, Judy Stepan-Norris, Belinda Robnett, and the editors and reviewers at Mobilization for their helpful comments.

Amanda Pullum is a Lecturing Fellow in the Thompson Writing Program at Duke University.

Please direct correspondence to amanda.pullum@duke.edu.
  • Download PDF