bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Strategy on the Campaign Trail in Iowa
Authors: Brady Henry E. 
Published: May 2006

We expect to find calculating, even Machiavellian, politicians in Cook County, Illinois or Placquemines Parish, Louisiana. It comes as something of a surprise to find them in Johnson County, Iowa, but with the quadrennial recurrence of the Iowa caucuses lowans become subtle calculators of their own advantage. Around caucus time, Iowa is a land of political strategists.In the following pages, I summarize my notes from several days spent observing the strategies of politicians, the media, and citizens in Iowa in 1988.
Our Political Condition
Authors: Price David E. 
Published: May 2006

Although I have enjoyed five productive and stimulating years in the House of Representatives, my satisfaction is tempered by the conviction that our collective response has often been inadequate to our country's needs. In the near term we are faced with a stubborn recession, the need to ease its pain and to promote economic recovery. But the long-term challenges are even more daunting: laying the groundwork for improved economic performance and an enhanced quality of life by investing in research, education, and training; rebuilding and extending our infrastructure; broadening access to adequate health care; stimulating savings and investment; and achieving budgetary accountability and control.The 102nd Congress has made some progress on these issues, most notably by approving a major high-way-transit program and an ambitious rewrite of the Higher Education Act. But on many other fronts Congress has found it difficult to act, and the president has offered little in the way of a domestic program save occasional vetoes of Democratic initiatives.The most obvious immediate barrier to effective governmental action is the federal budget deficit. The failure to correct the problem in the 1980s, when the economy was healthier and could have more easily withstood austerity measures, has left Congress and the president with equally unpromising alternatives: either rely on symbolic, hortatory, and largely ineffectual actions to counter economic adversity, or fund more serious recovery measures at the expense of a dangerous deepening of the deficit.
E. E. Schattschneider, the New Deal, and the Rejection of the Responsible Party Doctrine
Authors: Milkis Sidney M. 
Published: May 2006

E. E. Schattschneider's Party Government, published fifty years ago, is one of the early classics of behavioral political science. The enduring popularity of this book, however, stems less from its impressive analysis of the actual workings of American party politics than its advocacy of democratic reform. Party Government was a strong blow in behalf of “responsible party government,” a creed that has had an important influence on political science. Schattschneider later chaired the Committee on Political Parties of the American Political Science Association, which produced the famous report “Towards a More Responsible Two-Party System,” published in 1950. Much of the argument of the report was anticipated by Party Government, which advocated “party centralization” to overcome the local and sectional tendencies that defined traditional partisan politics in the United States (Schattschneider 1942; Committee on Political Parties 1950).Schattschneider considered political parties as perhaps the most archaic institutions in the United States: the American party system continued to operate as it had before the Civil War, that is, as two loose coalitions of state and local organizations, with very little national machinery and cohesion. The major parties were able to control the electoral process and bring people to the polls. Nevertheless, they failed to organize the nominees they elected to office into an effective, cohesive team for control of government. “Nearly all of the conflict and confusion of American government,” Schattschneider (1942, 30) claimed, “can be traced to the failure of the parties on this point.”With the growth of the federal government's responsibilities during the twentieth century, this failing of the traditional decentralized parties represented a distressing deterioration of representative democracy.
Comparing the Wilder and Gantt Campaigns: A Model for Black Candidate Success in Statewide Elections
Authors: Strickland Ruth Ann , Whicker Marcia Lynn 
Published: May 2006

Racism has been a part of black American heritage for over three centuries. Across the centuries, the systematic discrimination and oppression of blacks has raised barriers to opportunity as well as normality. Racism can take several forms including individual racism, institutional racism and cultural racism. Individual racism is fostered by individuals who categorize blacks as inferior. Even interracial contact under favorable conditions may not reduce this racist outlook. Institutional racism consists of institutions which are conceived as mechanisms to systematically oppress and limit the opportunities of black people. Cultural racism is exhibited by those who would like to homogenize black Americans—making them more white (Jones 1988: 127–31). We expect these forms of racism to have an impact on the political success of black candidates for office.During the late 1960s and early 1970s, efforts were made at the national level in particular to eliminate barriers to equal opportunity for black Americans. Many whites were unwilling to support full racial equality. The turbulent riots in predominantly black ghettos and the formation of black groups, such as the Black Panthers, spawned fear among some white populations.
Political Participation and “Teledemocracy”
Authors: Arterton F. Christopher 
Published: May 2006

The signs are abundant that many of the institutions and processes of American politics are becoming increasingly direct. As communication technologies erode the mediating roles played by secondary leadership, citizens and public officials interact directly with each other more intensively and more frequently.As this gale has moved through our political system, different scholars have noted their own particular “straw in the wind.” By far the most attention has been given to the declining capacity of party as a mechanism mediating between voters and office holders (Polsby, 1983; Kirkpatrick, 1978). A different viewpoint comes from Samuel Kernell, who has revised Richard Neustadt's work on the presidency by arguing that presidential power is increasingly secured and exercised through public opinion influence (Kernell, 1986). Those who have studied the activities of incumbent Congressmen and Senators note that they have also extended their direct contact with constituents: not only have the flows of mail into and out of congressional offices increased markedly over the past two decades, but the establishment of C-Span has brought congressional business into literally millions of homes (Abramson, Arterton, and Orren, 1988). Moreover, in a constant search for new ways of contacting citizens, congressmen are in the forefront of experimentation with cable television, satellites, VCRs and computer communications (Arterton, 1987).
Bertrand de Jouvenel: A Remembrance
Authors: Hale Dennis 
Published: May 2006

Bertrand de Jouvenel, who died a year ago this March, at the age of 83, is best known to American political scientists for three books—On Power (1945), Sovereignty (1957), and The Pure Theory of Politics (1963)—and several essays, among them “The Chairman's Problem” and “The Nature of Political Science.”I almost met Bertrand de Jouvenel in the summer of 1964, when I was 20 years old, a political science major at Oberlin College, and the editor of a student political magazine called The Activist. I was also a student of Wilson Carey McWilliams, a prolific source of article ideas for the magazine, and a reliable guide to the academics and journalists who we often tapped for free copy. Since I was about to spend two months in France, and since Carey had been de Jouvenel's student at Berkeley when de Jouvenel was a Visiting Professor there, why not take a letter of introduction and get an Activist article from one of Europe's most famous political scientists?
Some Lessons from Reagan's HUD: Housing Policy and Public Service
Authors: Moore Charles H. , Hoban-Moore Patricia A. 
Published: May 2006

There are multiple housing and community development programs involved in scandal at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The New York Times reports that “H.U.D. officials have said that at least 28 of the department's 48 programs and activities have ‘significant problems’ attributable to fraud, mismanagement, and favoritism” (August 13, 1989).Among the most significant (in both dollar volume and public visibility) are: Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation, Urban Development Action Grants, Title X Land Development Mortgage Insurance, Mortgage Coinsurance, sales of HUD-foreclosed properties, Retirement Service Centers, and the Secretary's Discretionary Fund. Dozens of former government officials, many from HUD, some presidential appointees and cabinet members, and Republican Party officials have profited through both consulting fees and by securing subsidies for their housing or development projects through these programs. There are now multiple congressional investigations, led by the House of Representatives Government Operations Sub-Committee on Employment and Housing (Rep. Tom Lantos, Chair) and the Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs (Rep. Henry Gonzales, Chair). The Times reports that the Department of Justice is pursuing 600 HUD-related cases (August 13, 1989).
The Long Legacy of Proposals to Rewrite the U.S. Constitution
Authors: Vile John R. 
Published: May 2006

The Symposium on “Divided Government and the Politics of Constitutional Reform” in the December 1991 issue of PS highlighted the way that critiques of current governmental policies and perceived ailments in the body politic are so often followed in America by proposals for constitutional change. While it is possible, as a number of the symposium participants indicated, to question whether modern diagnoses of the problems are accurate or whether constitutional reforms are the answer, Petracca is certainly correct in telling fellow political scientists that “debate about constitutional and political reform is healthy for the polity because it is an opportunity to rediscover and reconsider America's first principles of government” (1991, 635).While Petracca (1991, 634) reminded readers that critiques of divided government go at least as far back as Bryce's discussion in The American Commonwealth and Thurber mentioned Woodrow Wilson's reform efforts (1991, 653), it is rare to see a modern reformer who is fully aware of the legacy of reform proposals that now go back over 125 years. Even those who know the most about such history have been unaware of many plans. (See bibliography in Robinson 1985, 328-32; compare to Vile 1991b, 188-92.) This lack of knowledge is unfortunate because such information helps to put modern proposals like those of the Committee on the Constitutional System in perspective.
Why the Democrats Lose Presidential Elections: Toward a Theory of Optimal Loss
Authors: Erikson Robert S. 
Published: May 2006

In 1988, as in four of the previous five presidential elections, the Republicans won the White House with remarkable ease. Pundits have been busy explaining the inevitability of this result. Many attribute the Republican victory to ideology, repeating the familiar line that the Democrats now are too liberal to win a national election. Another popular explanation is the economy. The incumbent party never loses, we are told, when the economy is prosperous. Some even blame the Electoral College.Other explanations have been offered as well (e.g., Sigelman, 1988). Despite this disagreement on the details, two things appear certain. The Democrats had no chance in 1988. And the Democrats are in the throes of a painful electoral decline.But is any of this conventional wisdom correct? If we ignore the presidency, the current Democratic party enjoys a period of national hegemony perhaps unequaled since the Era of Good Feeling. For the past quarter century, the Democrats have almost continuously controlled more state legislatures and governorships than the Republicans. And the Democratic hold on Congress is even stronger than its hold on state government. After enjoying majority control for over three decades, the Democrats' lock on the U.S. House never was safer. Following the recent interruption of Republican control, the Senate now seems safely Democratic too. Add to all this a continuous Democratic plurality in party identification and one cannot doubt that the Democrats are the dominant party in the U.S. today and have been for decades.
The 1988 Presidential Nominations: Whatever Happened to Momentum?
Authors: Sigelman Lee 
Published: May 2006

‘Big Mo’ has just switched uniforms.—Dandy Don Meredith, football commentatorAccording to a staple item of conventional wisdom about the politics of presidential nominations, it has become essential for a candidate to perform well early in the primary and caucus season, weighing in with an early victory or, what is probably more important, an unexpectedly strong early showing. Toward that end, serious presidential aspirants now gear up their campaigns years in advance of the first primaries and caucuses, in the belief that in order to stand any chance of being nominated, they must establish from the very outset the viability of their candidacy. Since nomination contests are, in effect, winnowing processes (see, e.g., Matthews, 1978), presidential aspirants who fail to establish their credibility very early in the race may find themselves left at the post, their supporters having forsaken them for other, seemingly more electable candidates. On the other hand, those who do well early in the fray live to fight another day. Indeed, they are likely, according to a related bit of conventional wisdom, to hop aboard a victory bandwagon, with impressive early performances enhancing their support and this increased support in turn bolstering their subsequent performance.Taken in tandem, the ideas that it is vital to do well early and that doing well becomes self-perpetuating form the keystones of momentum-based interpretations of the presidential nomination process.
The Contributions of Theodore Lowi to Political Analysis and Democratic Theory
Authors: Sanders Elizabeth 
Published: May 2006

Lowi, like Gaul, can be divided into three parts: (1) the policy analysis (arenas of power) scheme; (2) democratic theory (juridical democracy, the critique of pluralism, rule of law); and (3) constitutional advocacy centering on designs for parliamentary government. It is in the second category, I believe, that he has made the most significant and lasting contribution.The first and earliest segment, the policy analysis scheme, was developed in articles, in and after the seminal 1964 book review in World Politics (Lowi 1964, 1972, 1976). Lowi's students have directly employed the policy typology in work on national institutions and policy development (Spitzer 1983; Sanders 1981). However, Lowi himself has not fully developed the implications of the typology in such a way that it could generate an integrated set of testable hypotheses and has failed to clear up essential definitions. The words used to label the four cells of the typology (distributive, regulatory, redistributive, and constituent) have fallen into common currency, but are used in a muddle of ways not consistent with the meanings I believe (as an alumna of Lowi's graduate public policy workshop) that he wants to attach to them. Much of this confusion, and the failure of this set of tantalizing ideas to bear much theoretical fruit, must be laid at the creator's doorstep for neglecting to draw out at length and in detail the typology's implications.
Socialism and Militarism: Confronting Ideology with Evidence
Authors: Dye Thomas R. , Zeigler Harmon 
Published: May 2006

Socialism is not merely a way of organizing an economy; it is also a secular religion. And as a religion it cannot be falsified; it cannot be dis-confirmed by empirical evidence in the minds of its adherents. Non-believers might think that the spectacular collapse of socialism around the world—its demonstrated unpopularity and illegitimacy—would impress Marxists in American universities. But academic Marxists remain insulated from world events, spinning out theoretical webs undisturbed by critical evidence.Recent events provide more dramatic evidence of the centrality of military force to socialist regimes. The collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe came about as a direct result of Mikhail Gorbachev's decision not to use military force to sustain these regimes; socialism survives in the People's Republic of China only because of the violent repression of Tiananmen Square.
Cultural Issues and Images in the 1988 Presidential Campaign: Why the Democrats Lost—Again!
Authors: Lieske Joel 
Published: May 2006

How do you explain the outcomes of modern presidential elections? This is the central dilemma of American politics. Why, for instance, did the Democrats, the so-called majority party, lose again in 1988? And why have they gone down to defeat in five of the last six presidential elections? Curiously, there appears to be no dearth of answers to these questions.Many pundits, such as neoconservative William Schneider (1988), have argued that the Democrats are too liberal to win a national election. Others maintain that presidential elections are retrospective referenda on the economy and peace issues. According to this view, the incumbent party never loses when times are prosperous and the nation is at peace. Still others argue that presidential elections are actually beauty contests in which voters select the candidate who demonstrates the most attractive combination of personality traits, leadership qualities, and political credentials (Miller, Wattenberg, and Malanchuk 1986). Yet others contend that most losing Democratic candidates have run notoriously inept campaigns. In the Yiddish vernacular, Dukakis was a “Putz.” Finally, some analysts (Burns, Peltason, and Cronin 1989: 276–77) try to please everyone by advancing umbrella explanations that include all of these arguments.Unfortunately, none of these explanations, taken individually, is particularly persuasive. And most appear to be little more than post hoc rationalizations. Of course, when something cannot be fully understood, we are prone to make fun of our ignorance.
Lessons of Athenian Democracy: Editor's Introduction
Authors: Grofman Bernard 
Published: May 2006

First, the good news: 1992-93 is the 2500th anniversary of the birth of democracy. It was in 507-508 B.C. that the reforms of Cleisthenes took place in Athens. In a world seemingly devoid of much to cheer about, here's an excuse to celebrate.Now, for the quibbles. If Cleisthenes is so important, why have I never heard of him? Moreover, why should I celebrate Athenian democracy when I know from both Madison and Hamilton in theFederalist Papersthat it was really mob rule, an example to be avoided at all costs in shaping a constitution for a republic in search of stability and good government? Hasn't Thucydides taught us that the fickleness of the Athenian populace led to repeated Athenian military disasters after the death of Pericles, the Athenian “first citizen” whom Thucydides sees as having ruled over Athens while permitting the masses the illusion that they were in control? Wasn't it an Athenian people's jury that forced the world's greatest philosopher to drink hemlock? Perhaps even more importantly, isn't it (politically) incorrect to call Athens a democracy? How can a militaristic society built on the backs of slaves and the revenues of imperialism, in which women couldn't own property or participate in politics, ever be something to celebrate?!
Democracy Ancient and Modern
Authors: Euben J. Peter 
Published: May 2006

With the collapse of communism and consequent disrepute of Marxism, there is a danger that liberalism will overwhelm democracy and that liberal political theory will become hegemonic despite the efforts of “communitarians” and postmodernists. I want to suggest that, given these developments, Athenian democracy and classical political theory read in its terms is a worthy political and theoretical interlocutor for both. (For a more detailed argument see the “Introduction” to Euben, Ober, and Wallach 1993.) This is not to engage in yet more polis envy, indulge in yet more Hellenic romanticism about “The Glory That Was Greece,” or endorse the uncritical worship of “great books.” My aim, rather, is to avoid the self-congratulation, complacency, and presentism that too often attends “our victory” in the Cold War and to make a contribution to the ensuing debate about American political identity.As this suggests, my concerns here are partly political. I want to indicate the strategies by which “Athenian democracy” is delegitimated as a challenge to contemporary democracy and question the way classical political theory is used to legitimate an antidemocratic political and educational agenda. That democratic Athens should be understood in terms of contemporary political controversies is nothing new. The Federalist Papers used it as an object lesson by which to justify limiting democracy in the name of republicanism, and debates over reform of the British Parliament and French Revolution found conservatives criticizing the politics of their own day in terms of the putative excesses of democratic Athens, much as Allan Bloom has done in our own time (Turner 1981, chaps. 1 and 5).
Athenian Democracy: Modern Mythmakers and Ancient Theorists
Authors: Saxonhouse Arlene W. 
Published: May 2006

Recent archaeological and textual studies by classical scholars give us new ways of thinking about Athenian democracy. Morgens Hansen, for example, has calculated the seating capacity of the Pnyx, the site where the Athenians held their assemblies. By figuring out how much space a seated adult Athenian male would occupy, he has concluded that the assembly in the fourth century B.C. could have held at most 6,000 people. That is a third or fourth of the potential participants (Hansen 1983, 18). Another classical scholar argues that attendance was considerably below this and concludes: “The Athenians had never seen a full meeting of the citizen body, though the very idea of democracy is predicted on it. From the very start they must have accepted that any assembly was bound to be a sample of the citizenship—and not even a random sample” (Carter 1986, 193). Other questions worthy of being asked but not asked before are now raised: How were votes actually counted? How does one calculate a closely divided vote when there are 6,000 people sitting in the assembly?In one of the classic books on Athenian democracy published in 1957, the author claimed: “Prima facie the Athenian democracy would seem to have been a perfectly designed machine for expressing and putting into effect the will of the people” (Jones [1957] 1964, 3). Hansen, with his calculations of the seating capacity of the Pnyx, and scholars questioning the degree to which and how citizens really engaged in the political life of Athens, are motivated by this perspective on ancient democracy.