and thus kept the existing system in being until the 1990 s. It also strengthened the
position of these parties in both organizational and popular terms.
This use of referendums and initiatives by new and opposition parties to publicize
themselves and sometimes to threaten governments was historically used in
Switzerland,Wrst by the Catholic party at the end of the nineteenth century and then
by the socialists in the interwar period to force themselves into the governing coalition
(Linder 1994 , 19 – 21 , 29 – 31 ). From the 1970 s onwards the Republicans have used this
technique to transform themselves from the subordinate to the dominant party in
southern andwestern USstates, andare nowstarting to do the same in California.One
shouldavoidequatingthedeclineofpreviouslydominantpartiesliketheDemocratsas
evidenceforaweakeningofpartiesassuch.Allthesecasesdemonstratethatasoneparty
goes down the others go up. It could even be argued that direct democracy strengthens
‘‘the forces restoring party competition’’ (Stokes and Iverson 1962 ).
In a careful comparative analysis based on both case studies and statistical
evidence, Mendelsohn and Parkin ( 2001 , 7 – 8 and passim) conclude there is simply
no evidence for direct democracy weakening parties. On the contrary, as argued
above, it adds to their repertoire—while of course allowing for more interventions
by other groups and by electors themselves. We turn in the next section to an
examination of how the concrete forms and procedures of direct democracy give
relative advantages to the various participants—again with a primary focus on
political parties, given that modern direct democracy like modern representative
democracy is above all party democracy.
4 Procedures of Direct Democracy—
Referendum and Initiative
.........................................................................................................................................................................................
The two forms which individual policy voting takes in the modern world are the
referendum and the initiative. In general the referendum is called by some political
body, most often the (party-controlled) government, while the initiative is
instituted by petition from a suYcient number of citizens. The rules governing
initiation of the process obviously give greater or lesser scope to various political
actors to inXuence voting. If voting is at the government’s discretion they can call a
referendum only when they hope to win (or ‘‘agree to disagree’’ to avoid damaging
internal splits). This gives them considerable tactical advantages as well as dimin-
ishing the eYcacy of the popular vote. On the other hand, where initiatives can be
organized independently of government wishes, greater scope exists for excluded
602 ian budge