Taking the Initiative

This article from The Harvard Crimson (which has nothing on the Cav Daily, I think we can all agree) explores the effect of pressure groups on ballot initiatives such as the one which legalized marijuana in Colorado last week. As with standard elections, political action groups expend resources to maximize their utility. In essence, money spent on "circulating pamphlets, identifying voters, and other forms of campaigning" figures into pressure groups' political influence function via Becker.
An interesting distinction between campaigning for ballot initiatives and stumping for candidates lies in the necessity for groups to articulate their positions (informative campaigning) on ballot initiatives as opposed to spewing out the standard, bland persuasive campaigning rhetoric that defines candidate-centered elections. For Defend Oregon, the PAC examined in the study, to lobby for/against its ballot initiative, it necessarily must elucidate to voters a clear stance on the issue at hand (tax-breaks for big corporations, in this case). Still, Defend Oregon's website brims with vague sentiments intended to rally every voter around the issue. The group claims, for instance, to be protecting Oregon's "most important priorities"--implying that all Oregonians should support them if their priorities are in order.
Despite its salient messge, this article does fail to fully explain how the study controlled for variables in determining that flyers for ballot intiatives in the 2008 election directly influenced voters.