Suchergebnisse

The 2000 presidential election, marked by a crisis in the electoral process in the state of Florida and a challenge to the legitimacy of the election of George W. Bush, sparked a national debate on the quality of American democracy. The discussion quickly came to focus on "technical" problems associated with voting practices, including issues related to voter registration, ballot counting, ballot machinery, and election administration. Numerous commissions weighed in on these issues and made recommendations for reforming various aspects of the election system.1 Congress debated election reform and ultimately passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) at the end of the 107th Session of Congress in 2002. Legislatures in all fifty states also took up the issue, and many states passed measures to improve election administration.

Congressional leadership takes place within an institution that serves two primary functions: making laws and representing citizens. Leaders play essential roles organizing the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senatethey set the schedule for debating bills and resolutions; formulate proposals to address public problems; represent their party's priorities through the media and in relations with leaders of the opposing party; support or oppose the president's initiatives in the legislative process; and build coalitions to pass legislation. The main challenge of congressional leadership is to advance the collective interests of the nation or of the leader's political party, while enabling individual members of Congress to represent their constituents. This entry describes the roles and responsibilities of congressional leaders, reviews the relevant theories for explaining congressional leadership, identifies notable congressional leaders in various historical situations, and raises key issues for further study.

Nearly four decades ago, in a path-breaking book, Aaron Wildavsky taught us, among other things, that "in the most integral sense the budget lies at the heart of the political process" (The Politics of the Budgetary Process, 1964, p. 5). Building on Wildavsky's study, many scholars have contributed to our understanding of various aspects of budget policy and politics. Some have discussed the role of trust funds in the federal budget, but none have made them the central focus of their research. Eric Patashnick fills an important void in the literature by explaining why trust funds are created and how they affect deliberation over tax and spending decisions. Using the trust fund mechanism as a point of reference, Patashnik also tests theories of policy history, public choice, and institutionalism.

How did a Democratic president and a Republican Congress reach agreement at a time of intense partisanship, mutual distrust, and suspicion? How were leaders of opposing parties able to negotiate a good-faith agreement to balance the budget, reduce spending for Medicare, and cut taxes? Does the agreement truly deserve the praise given by its supporters or the criticism dealt by its opponents? Daniel J. Palazzolo answers these questions with a vivid, first-person account of federal budget politics. In "Done Deal?" Palazzolo debunks conventional views of Washington politics that portray an antiquated separation-of-powers system hopelessly mired in partisan politics. Applying a realist expectations perspective, he recognizes the possibilities and limitations of the American political system and identifies inherent constraints on policy reform. His careful analysis highlights the system's capacity to adapt to changing circumstances and produce important changes in policy. ; https://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf/1154/thumbnail.jpg

An undergraduate course on research methods and analysis is fertile ground for service-learning in political science. Research methods courses teach students a variety of data-collection and analysis methods, and many community service agencies and nonprofit organizations typically benefit from research on how their services are provided and how such services can be improved. This essay illustrates how undergraduate students can use survey design techniques to help community service organizations collect data on program effectiveness and program development.

The Speakers of the House, from Carl Albert to Tom Foley, have faced various challenges in the budgetary process since the passage of the Budget Act in 1974. That act required the Congress to fix budget targets in authorizations and outlays in each of thirteen functional categories for each fiscal year and to reconcile annual authorizations and appropriations to those targets. It created separate budget committees in each chamber and altered the legislative process in an attempt to enforce budget discipline. Some challenges have been defined by the individual Speakers themselves; others have emerged from institutional changes in the budget process, large deficits, and the political context within which budget decisions have been made. Speaker Albert's primary challenge was to meet the formal guidelines of the new budget process. Under Speaker Tip O'Neill, the task of facilitating the formal procedures of the Budget Act gave way to managing various forms of conflict over budget priorities, representing the House majority party in negotiations with Senate leaders and the president, and acting as a spokesperson for the Democratic party. Speaker Jim Wright used the budget resolution to define the priorities of the Democratic party. Speaker Foley's major challenge has been to facilitate passage of two major deficit reduction bills, first under a divided government in which opposing parties controlled the Congress and the White House and then under the leadership of President Bill Clinton.