Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:04:09.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multi-dimensional Party Competition: Abortion Politics in Ireland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 April 2017

Sean McGraw
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While the questions of how parties seek to address (or not) pressing issues are critically important, scholars have generally paid little attention to where issues are addressed within the political system, and the consequences for party competition of that choice. The fact that issues can be addressed within several institutional (i.e. functional) domains and levels – general elections, parliament, referenda, courts, local government, etc. – implies that political parties may address an issue, and thereby interact with one another, in consequentially different ways depending on the institutional arena or level of government wherein they seek resolution. This article describes how Ireland’s parties addressed the electorally volatile issue of abortion via referendum campaigns. The article draws upon multiple sources of evidence to support its findings, including original data based on results from the author’s two parliamentary surveys following the 2007 and 2011 election campaigns.

Keywords

political partiesreferendumparliamentary surveyabortionIreland
Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 53 , Issue 4 , October 2018 , pp. 682 - 706
Copyright
© The Author(s). Published by Government and Opposition Limited and Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Sean McGraw is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame. Contact email: mcgraw.4@nd.edu.

References

Adams, G.D. (1997), ‘Abortion: Evidence of an Issue Evolution’, American Journal of Political Science, 3: 718–737.Google Scholar
Bardi, L. and Mair, P. (2008), ‘The Parameters of Party Systems’, Party Politics, 14(2): 147–166.Google Scholar
Budge, I. and Bara, J. (2001), ‘Introduction: Content Analysis and Political Texts’, in I. Budge, H.D. Klingemann, A. Volkens, J. Bara and E. Tanenbaum (eds), Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments, 1945–1998 (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 1–16.Google Scholar
Budge, I., Klingemann, H.D., Volkens, A., Bara, J. and Tanenbaum, E. (2001) (eds), Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments, 1945–1998 (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Collins, S. (2013), ‘Over 70% Support X-Case Legislation on Abortion’, Irish Times, 11 February.Google Scholar
Engeli, I. and Varone, F. (2012), ‘Morality Politics in Switzerland: Politicization through Direct Democracy’, in I. Engeli, C. Green-Pedersen and L. Thorup Larsen (eds), Morality Politics in Western Europe: Parties, Agendas and Policy Choices (New York: Palgrave Macmillan): 88–113.Google Scholar
Gallagher, M. (1996), ‘Ireland: The Referendum as a Conservative Device?’, in M. Gallagher and P.V. Uleri (eds), The Referendum Experience in Europe (New York: St Martin’s Press): 86–105.Google Scholar
Gallagher, M. (2011), ‘Parties and Referendums in Ireland 1937–2011’, Irish Political Studies, 26(4): 535–544.Google Scholar
Gallagher, M. (2015), ‘On the Same-sex Marriage and Presidential Age Referendums’, online post, Irish Politics Forum, 27 May, http://politicalreform.ie/2015/05/27/on-the-same-sex-marriage-and-presidential-age-referendums/.Google Scholar
Girvin, B. (1994), ‘Moral Politics and the Irish Abortion Referendums, 1992’, Parliamentary Affairs, 47(2): 203–221.Google Scholar
Hesketh, T. (1990), The Second Partitioning of Ireland?: The Abortion Referendum of 1983 (Laoghaire: Brandsma Books).Google Scholar
Irish Times (2008a), ‘Muslims Have Integrated Well Despite Recent Arrival’, 14 May.Google Scholar
Irish Times (2008b), ‘Many Faiths in a Changing Ireland’, 15 May.Google Scholar
Kennedy, F. (2002), ‘Abortion Referendum 2002’, Irish Political Studies, 17(1): 114–128.Google Scholar
Layman, G.C. (2001), The Great Divide: Religious and Cultural Conflict in American Party Politics (New York: Columbia University Press).Google Scholar
Maor, M. (1997), Political Parties and Party Systems: Comparative Approaches and the British Experience (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
Marsh, M., Sinnott, R., Garry, J. and Kennedy, F. (2008), The Irish Voter: The Nature of Electoral Competition in the Republic of Ireland (Manchester: Manchester University Press).Google Scholar
McGarry, P. (2012), ‘Catholics’ Beliefs Not Always by the Book’, Irish Times, 30 November.Google Scholar
McGraw, S. (2015), How Parties Win: Shaping the Irish Political Arena (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press).Google Scholar
Meguid, B. (2008), Party Competition Between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
O’Mahony, J. (1998), ‘The Irish Referendum Experience’, Representation, 35(4): 225–236.Google Scholar
Putnam, R.D. and Campbell, D.E. (2010), American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us (New York: Simon and Schuster).Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E.E. (1960), The Semisovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America (New York: Wadsworth Thomson Learning).Google Scholar
Sinnott, R. (1995), Irish Voters Decide: Voting Behaviour in Elections and Referendums since 1918 (Manchester: Manchester University Press).Google Scholar
Sinnott, R. (2002), ‘Cleavages, Parties, and Referendums: Relationships between Representative and Direct Democracy in the Republic of Ireland’, European Journal of Political Research, 41: 811–826.Google Scholar
Volkens, A. (2001), ‘Quantifying the Election Programmes: Coding Procedures and Controls’, in I. Budge, H.D. Klingemann, A. Volkens, J. Bara and E. Tanenbaum (eds), Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments, 1945–1998 (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 93–109.Google Scholar
Volkens, A., Lehmann, P., Merz, N., Regel, S., Werner, A. and Schultze, H. (2014), ‘The Manifesto Data Collection’, Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR), Version 2014b (Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin for Sozialforschung (WZB)).Google Scholar
Wolbrecht, C. (2000), The Politics of Women’s Rights: Parties, Positions, and Change (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar