The “Medicinal Cannabis Question”: How Actors Legitimate Vote Choice on Medical Marijuana Policy

ABSTRACT

While there has been much analysis of how policymakers shape criminal justice policy in the United States, the role of voters in legitimating such policy has been largely overlooked. This is important because of the growing use of ballot measures by states to determine criminal justice policy, such as the legal status of medical cannabis. What are the collective narratives that voters draw upon to legitimate their vote choices on these measures and how does their usage vary? Patterns of individual-level legitimation that use collective narratives matter because they provide evidence of actors’ internalization of such narratives, which suggests the presence and activation of corresponding automatic processes that have been linked to judgment and decision-making. For this study I analyzed respondent legitimations of vote choice on a 2010 ballot measure that sought to legalize medicinal cannabis for a case set of 91 white male voters. Surprisingly, I found the use of a liberal political narrative that spanned party lines for those who voted to approve the measure. Furthermore, I found evidence of a neoliberal narrative of individual responsibility for patient care that reaffirms scholarship on the intersection of neoliberalism and consumerism in healthcare.

KEYWORDS:

• Medical marijuana
• direct democracy
• voting
• economic policy
• dual-process model

View correction statement:

Corrigendum

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Jeff Sallaz, Jane Zavisca, Albert Bergesen, Lane Kenworthy, Terrence Hill, Corey Abramson, Brianda Torres-Traylor, and anonymous reviewers for their feedback. I would also like to thank Gina Marie Walsh, Eleanor Stilson, Colleen Pignato, Rochelle Cox, Sherry Bao, Christine Scolinos, and Adrian Barbachan for their contributions.

Funding

This research was made possible in part by a grant from the University of Arizona Graduate and Professional Student Council. Award Reference Number RSRCH-505FY’15.

Additional information

Funding

This research was made possible in part by a grant from the University of Arizona Graduate and Professional Student Council. Award Reference Number RSRCH-505FY’15.

Notes on contributors

Luis Vila-Henninger

Luis Vila-Henninger is a doctoral candidate at the University of Arizona. His dissertation and subsequent research uses semi-structured interviews with respondents about economic ballot measures to investigate voter reasoning. Luis’ research areas include economic sociology, political sociology, the sociology of culture, criminology, and sociological theory. Luis’ work has appeared in The Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, Sociology Compass, and Sociological Perspectives.