We contribute to an understanding of the determinants of voter support for US prohibition policies in the early 1900s, by separating substantive preferences for wet versus dry policies from preferences for centralized versus decentralized control. Prior studies of prohibition referenda have generated various conclusions about which groups supported and opposed prohibition, whether regarding the role of religion, urban/rural residence, immigrant status, gender, or class. But none of these studies has considered the impact of preferences regarding decentralization on voter support for prohibition measures. We exploit a combination of referenda unique to the 1933 Ohio ballot, where voters considered prohibition-repeal measures alongside a county home-rule amendment. By viewing support for home rule as a proxy for decentralization preferences we clarify and explain anomalies in prior studies regarding determinants of support for prohibition and its repeal, especially regarding urban counties and some evangelical denominations, which are shown to have been guided by a preference for local control of alcohol policy, and counties with larger proportions of women, which are associated with greater support for more centralized and uniform alcohol policy.

中文翻译：

---

禁止投票：消除对酒精和权力下放的偏好

通过将湿政策与干政策的实质性偏好与集中与分散控制的偏好分开，我们有助于理解选民对 1900 年代初期美国禁令政策的支持的决定因素。先前对禁止公投的研究已经得出了关于哪些群体支持和反对禁止的各种结论，无论是关于宗教的作用、城市/农村居住地、移民身份、性别还是阶级。但这些研究都没有考虑关于权力下放的偏好对选民支持禁止措施的影响。我们利用了 1933 年俄亥俄州投票所特有的公投组合，在该投票中，选民考虑了禁止废除措施以及县自治条例修正案。