“IT HAPPENED BEHIND CLOSED DOORS”: LEGISLATIVE BUFFERING AS AN INFORMAL MECHANISM OF POLITICAL MEDIATION*
The political mediation model explains movement policy outcomes ranging from complete failure to total success. However, the qualitative mechanisms through which political mediation occurs empirically remain understudied, especially as they relate to the content-specifying stages of the legislative process. Furthermore, while we know that political mediation is context dependent, key elements of what political context entails remain underspecified. This article addresses these gaps by tracing the influence of a coalition of social movement organizations (SMOs) seeking to simultaneously shape the content of two major climate bills in a progressive U.S. state where the climate movement enjoys a relatively favorable political context overall. Comparing the divergent trajectories and outcomes of the two bills illuminates the process of legislative buffering, which is conceptualized as an informal mechanism of political mediation. The comparative analysis also reveals situational elements of political context that can present additional hurdles movements must overcome to maximize their success.
Contributor Notes
* Joshua A. Basseches is a PhD Candidate in the Department of Sociology at Northwestern University, where he is also affiliated with the Legal Studies Program and the Institute for Policy Research.
† The author thanks Monica Prasad, Anthony S. Chen, and Brayden G. King for their sage advice dating back to this project's earliest stages. Charles (Chas) Camic, Robert Braun, and Eulalie Laschever also read the full manuscript and provided valuable feedback at various stages of its development. Rahardhika (Dhika) Utama and Erik Lovell helped with the figure. A grant from the Kellogg School of Management's Dispute Resolution Research Center and additional support from the Northwestern Sociology department greatly assisted this research