American Political Science Research Guide: Volume 1

225 Pages·1977·18.486 MB·English

by  George W. Johnson (auth.), George W. Johnson (eds.)

American Political Science
Research Guide
Volume 1
Edited by
GEORGE W. JOHNSON
IFI/PLENUM • NEW YORK-WASHINGTON-LONDON
library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Main entry under title:
American political science research guide.
Includes indexes.
1. United States-Politics and government-Research-Collected works.
2. Public administration-Research-United States-Collected works. I.
Johnson, George W.
JA88.U6A75 320.9'73 77-21809
ISBN-13: 978-1-4684-8484-7 e-ISBN-13: 978-1-4684-8482-3
DOl: 10.1007/978-1-4684-8482-3
© 1977 IFIjPlenum Data Company
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1s t edition 1977
A Division of Plenum Publishing Corporation
227 West 17th Street, New York, N.Y. 10011
All rights in this book are reserved. No part of this book,
including the index classification system, may be used
or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without
written permission except in the case of brief
quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.
CONTENTS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction vii
~
Models of Judicial Decision-Making ix
by Stuart Nagel and Marian Neef
American Politics: A Survey of Progress xiii
by Eric M. Us1aner
Frequency Report 1
JUdiciary • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . .. 17
Legislative and Executive Branches 57
Public Administration . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 79
State and Local Government 173
Subject Index .....•.•........... , .... " 193
Author Index 207
• • • • • • • • • , • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • •
v
INTRODUCTION
The American PoZiticaZ Science Research Guide to their efforts. Individuals in administra
is a new series dealing generally with Ameri tive positions will also find that the APSRG
can government and specifically with public offers a means for keeping current on public
administration, state and local government, policy questions, despite the normal restric
the legislative and executive branches, and tions of time and circumstance.
the judiciary.
The key to the entire program is the use of the
As an innovative idea, the APSRG is an approach data base of the Political Science Series of
to political research which focuses upon a the Universal Reference System. Combining ele
single area within the discpline of political ments of the definitive URS Supplement and a
science. The first in a proposed series of refined indexing procedure, the APSRG is pro
softcover research guides, the APSRG is repre duced under the superv~s~on of the same schol
sentative of the guiding principle of provid ars who develop that annual supplement.
ing a select but relatively comprehensive
guide to the current literature of a clearly A reference volume is judged on many levels; it
defined segment of the behavioral and social must be complete, well written, oriented toward
sciences. In Volume 1, the spectrum of posi its users, and utilitarian in the everyday
tions on the issues of the American experience sense. It is the last quality which is probably
and profiles of individual decision makers most significant, yet the hardest to portray in
allow the serious scholar to judiciously ex a brief statement such as this. The following
amine the possible constituents of a biblio is a brief sample of the indexing method which
graphy, suggesting avenues of study which may may provide some criteria upon which to make the
have otherwise escaped attention. purchasing decision.
Part of the rationale for developing this ap Subject Index. The indexing and cross-refer
proach is that there exists a demand for a encing portion of the guide uses a descriptor
specific research tool which takes into ac system to group abstracts whose content con
count that individual students and researchers sists of material of a similar nature. The
have need for a general research volume which system provides easy access to a wide variety
details American political documents. The of topics through an extensive listing of
solution arrived at here is to utilize a each descriptive word with a companion numer
paperback format with a carefully defined ical list, indicating which abstracts apply
scope. Reasonably priced, the APSRG can be to the word.
added to the reference shelves of political
science departments and general reference Author Index. Since we have chosen to sepa
libraries and to the book lists of university rate the abstracts within the APSRG into the
level courses. Researchers in both the aca areas of public administration, state and
demic and private sectors will find that this local government, the legislative and execu
approach is sophisticated enough to contribute tive branches, and the judiciary, we have
vi i
provided an author index which allows the ing variously with comparative politics and
student to quickly find all of the articles international relations.
which a particular author has written in a
given time period. As a final observation, I wish to express my
deep appreciation to Professors Nagel, Neef,
In addition to the abstracting and indexing and Uslaner for their patience in dealing with
sections of the APSRG, we have included two a new pUblication. Their willingness to foster
articles, by Professors Stuart Nagel and unique ideas and observations has offered an
Marian Neef and by Professor Eric Uslaner. attractive addition to an already valuable doc
The purpose here has been both to review the ument. Also, thanks go to Frank Columbus of
state of political research and to offer an Plenum, who listened with the proper amount of
example of part of the research within the caution and restraint while I broached and idea
scope of American politics. of the APSRG. His perception and guidance were
invaluable.
Understanding that we have limited ourselves
to observing only one part of political sci
ence, we hope to offer other supplements in George W. Johnson
the near future, similar to the APSRG, deal- Editor
vi i i
MODELS OF JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING
STUART NAGEL AND MARIAN NEEF
Political Science Department~ University of Illinois
A social science model consists of a series according to Justice Roberts by reading rele
of statements or equations that are designed vant portions of the Constitution. Doing so
to capture the essence of a type of bel!l:ivior. might lead one to state that the Constitution
The purposes of such models are to deduce requires that all federal laws be made by Con
predictions of what will happen given certain gress or by quasi-legislative governmental
changes in the inputs, or to deduce prescrip agencies under the control of Congress and not
tions of what ought to be done given certain by private bodies. The second part of Roberts'
desired outputs. Models of judicial decision statement in effect says, "These are the facts."
making consist of basically four kinds. First That part is determined by examining the Con
in order of development within the social sci gressional statute, administrative action, or
ences is the legalistic model, which views other behavior whose constitutionality or legal
judicial decisions as the deduced conclusions ity is being questioned. Doing so might lead
from premises about case facts and normative one to state that the National Recovery Act of
law. Second is the group theory model, which 1933 does delegate law-making authority to
views judicial decisions as the product of trade associations and other private bodies.
external interest group activities and the The third part of the syllogism involves draw
interaction of internal subgroups on multiple ing a conclusion from the law premises and the
judge courts. Third is the input-output or fact premises with regard to whether the fac
regression model, which views judicial de tual situation is legal or not. In this con
cisions as variations on a dependent variable text, given our interpretation of the law and
that is the effect of the characteristics of the facts, it does seem to follow that the
the judges and the cases. Fourth is the de National Recovery Act was unconstitutional.
cision theory model, which views judicial
decisions as an attempt to choose the alter That kind of legalistic model may be an exag
native that has the highest expected benefits geration of the objectivity involved in deter
minus expected costs. mining what the law is and what the facts are
in any given judicial case. Judges, like other
people, differ in what they think the law re
I. THE LEGALISTIC MODEL quires, especiallY law at the constitutional
level, which tends to be so general. Judges
The legalistic model of judicial decision likewise differ in their perception of the
making is best exemplified or possibly exag facts, especially where (1) the facts involve
gerated by Supreme Court Justice Roberts' interpreting the meaning of an ideologically
supposed statement that all the Supreme Court emotional governmental act, or where (2) there
does in deciding the constitutionality of a is conflicting testimony over what happened,
congressional statute is place the statute and the sides of the conflict reflect different
next to the Constitution to determine whether social interests. Nevertheless, the legalistic
or not they conflicto Such a statement can model can be quite useful in predicting judicial
be interpreted as saying that judicial de behavior and in making recommendations to per
cision-making basically involves a three-part sons who are involved in or influenced by that
syllogism. The first part in effect says, behavior.
"This is the lawo" That part is determined
ix
To use the legalistic model in predicting (1) interviewing those associated with interest
judicial behavior, one seeks to determine how groups to determine their strategies and experi
the judges involved are likely to interpret ences and (2) reading the memoirs of judges to
the law and to perceive the facts. Doing that determine their interactions which they do not
means reading prior judicial opinions in order express in their opinions.
to obtain an inductive feel for how the rele
vant law is interpreted. It also means exam The group theory approach, like all the models,
ining prior appellate or trial cases in order is applicable to both the landmark Supreme Court
to see how judges or juries generally perceive decisions and the lowest trial court decisions.
similar factual situations. Those are the At the trial court level, however, there are no
techniques used by law students, appellate interest group briefs filed, and there is no
lawyers, and trial lawyers for predictive pur interaction among judicial voting blocs since
poses with a high degree of accuracy. Those there is only one judge deciding each trial
same techniques can enable one to recommend to case. Nevertheless, criminal cases generally
a lawyer, a litigant, an interest group, or a involve implicit group conflict between prose
judge what precedents and facts one ought to cutors who represent upper-middle-class inter
emphasize in order to achieve a desired de ests and norms against defendants who represent
C1Slon. The model may be both predictive and working-class violators of those norms. Like
prescriptive, but it tends to be superficial wise, personal injury cases generally involve
in getting at the role of nonlegal causal implicit conflict between wealthy insurance
elements and underlying judicial motivation businesses against plaintiffs and their sup
which the other models tend to emphasize, porters who are seeking a form of redistribu
tion of that wealth. The relative position
taken by an individual judge in a large set of
II. THE GROUP THEORY MODEL cases rather than in a single case may substan
tially reflect his sympathy for one or the
The group theory model of judicial decision other of these conflicting interests.
making is best exemplified by analyzing those
Supreme Court cases that are highly ideological
and thus tend to involve (1) numerous interest III. THE INPUT-OUTPUT MODEL
groups filing briefs designed to influence the
Court and (2) cohesive self-conscious blocs The legalistic model and to a lesser extent the
within the Court itself seeking to influence group theory model are mainly oriented toward
the decision or the justifying opinion. For analyzing individual cases. The input-output
example, the minimum wage and other New Deal and decision theory models, on the other hand,
cases in the 1930s often involved briefs filed are more oriented toward generalizations across
by the National Association of Manufacturers, cases. The input-output model in its most de
the U. S. Chamber of Commerce, and the American veloped form involves taking a large number of
Federation of Labor, just as civil liberties cases from a given field and positioning each
and related organizations filed briefs in the case with regard to the direction of its deci
civil liberties cases of the 1950s and 1960s. sion and the direction on each of many predic
In those cases, there were also often divisions tive input variables. For example in applying
within the Supreme Court that reflected the this model, one might take about 150 civil
sympathy of the judges for those conflicting liberties cases heard by the Supreme Court in
interest groups and their respective causes. the 1950s and position each case on whether the
case involved (1) broadening or narrowing civil
The group theory model is especially relevant liberties in the decision, (2) a southern or
to political science, social psychology, and northern factual situation, (3) free speech,
institutional economics as contrasted to law. criminal procedure, or equal protection legal
Political scientists often view policy-making subject matter, (4) a Supreme Court consisting
as involving interest group conflict; social of a high or low percentage of Democratic
psychologists often view collective decisions judges, and (5) interest group briefs or not.
as involving interaction among subgroupings The data on cases and variables might then be
within the collectivity; and institutional processed by a computer in order to obtain a
economists often think of conflicts being re predictive regression equation of the form
solved in terms of relative economic class Y = a + b1X1 + .•• +bnXn~, where Y is a 0 for
power. The group theory model involves going a narrowing decision and a 1 for a broadening
beyond reading the law library cases the way decision, a is the value of Y when all the X
lawyers do and getting into such techniques as inputs are scored 0 rather than 1, and each b
x
represents the relative weight of each input defendant if the costs of releasing him when he
in determining the output decision. would fail to appear (discounted by the proba
bility of his not appearing) are Zess than the
The input-output or regression model is quite costs of holding him when he would appear (dis
broad in that the input variables (as indi counted by the probability of his appearing).
cated in the example above) can include vari
ables that relate to facts, the law, who the The decision theory model enables one to pre
judges are, and the role of interest groups, dict decisions if one knows the normative
as well as many other variables. It is thus values of the decision maker with regard to the
a model particularly relevant to developing benefits and costs and if one knows the empiri
broad generalizations although it tends to cal pe~ceptions of the decision maker with re
miss the more narrow and idiosyncratic ele gard to the contingent probabilities under con
ments that are especially emphasized in the sideration. More important, however, than pre
legalistic model. The input-output model dicting decisions in individual cases, the
inherently tends to do this because it usu model enables one to predict the direction (and
ally starts with the problem of accounting to some extent the magnitude) of changes in
for variation in a set of cases, whereas the judicial decisions from changes that affect the
legal approach usually starts with a specific actual or perceived benefits, costs, or contin
forthcoming case whose outcome one is seeking gent probabilities. Thus, one can predict that
to predict. The broadness of the input-output judges are likely to do more releasing if their
approach extends not only to the kind of cases type 1 error costs can be increased whereby
and variables it uses, but also to its concern they suffer more embarrassment than they pre
for what happens after the case is decided. sently do for holding defendants who would have
That concern can be partly expressed in terms appeared if released. Such embarrassment can
of a reciprocal causation of the input vari probably be facilita~ed by internally or ex
ables onto the decisions, and of the decisions ternally publicizing (1) which judges have high
back onto some of the input variables. Special holding percentages, (2) the lack of variation
regression analysis techniques are being de in appearance percentages between the high and
veloped to analyze that kind of reciprocal low holding judges, and (3) the high cost of
causation. They involve either multiple stages holding defendants in jail prior to trial re
in the analysis or time series data rather than lative to the cost of rearresting them if they
one period in time. do not appear. Possibly even more important
than predicting changes in decisional patterns
through a decisional theory model is its closely
IV. THE DECISION THEORY MODEL related use in generating ideas for how to en
courage desired decisional patterns by working
To a much greater extent than any of the pre through the actual or perceived benefits, costs,
vious models, the decision theory model focuses and contingent probabilities.
on what the judges perceive is likely to happen
subsequent to their decisions as the means for o - 0 - 0 - 0
explaining why they decide as they do, and also
as a means for trying to influence their deci These four models are not mutually exclusive.
sions in a given desired direction. More spe They can be used simultaneously to analyze spe
cifically, the decision theory model operates cific cases or sets of cases, at either the
on the assumption that judges (like all people) appellate or trial court level. They can gen
when faced with a choice will try to choose the erate predictions, causal understanding, and
alternative decision that is perceived to have normative recommendations. The main thing that
the highest expected benefits minus expected all four models have in common is that they are
costs, monetary and nonmonetary. For example, capable of provoking useful insights that might
a judge, trying to decide whether to release otherwise be missed by viewing judicial deci
or hold a defendant prior to trial will decide sion-making from only one of the perspectives.
to release the defendant if the benefits of They all help to understand more fully the
releasing him when he would appear (discounted basic simplicities and subtle complexities of
by the probability of his appearing) are judicial decision-making.
gpeatep than the benefits of holding him when
he would fail to appear (discounted by the
probability of his failing to appear). Phrased
in terms of costs rather than benefits, one
could say a judge will decide to release the
xi
AMERICAN POLITICS
A SURVEY OF PROGRESS
ERICM. USLANER
Department of Government and Politics~ University of MaryZand
Reform and patterns of change are the major new only mixed support for the contention that the
areas of investigation in recent work on Ameri American party system is undergoing a major re
can politics. In one sense, we have come "full alignment. A new study by Warren E. Miller and
circle" to the era of the 1940s, before the Teresa E. Levitin of the Center for Political
"behavioral revolution" and the "post-behavior Studies at the University of Michigan (Miller
al era." The concern for reform has been was one of the original authors of The American
marked by both normative commitments (not al Voter) finds support for the realignment thesis
ways favorable to the efforts of the disparate in Leadership and Change, while Walter Dean
group of activists who are called "reformers") Burnham continues to argue that the party sys
ane. a more detailed empirical consideration of tem has deteriorated so much that it is almost
what the consequences of these reform efforts meaningless to talk about a realignment. The
have been. The concern for change has partial 1976 election, however, seems to have shattered
ly been fostered by the reform movements, but the pictures of change in American politics
it would simply be incorrect to state that the that each of these studies has drawn. The in
latter are the most important factors in ana creasingly ideological voter seems to have
lyzing trends over time. Instead, there has given way to his earlier counterpart, whose
been a growing realization that American vote largely depended upon party identifica
politics in the mid-1970s is quite different tion. We obviously need much more research to
from what it was a decade ago at every level. determine the extent to which 1976 may have
The changes in voting behavior and in legisla been an unusual year in an era which seems to
tive-executive relations have been the most have been marked by substantial change. Even
visible. The studies which address the ques as party identification reappears as a maj or de
tion of change generally seek out the sources terminant of Presidential voting, Congressional
of these developments, rather than the norma elections seem to be marked by the triumph of
tive concerns underlying them, and have begun incumbency over the traditional electoral
to use the more advanced quantitative methods forces. We are indeed in a period of change,
which the behavioral revolution spawned. including major reforms in the operation of
party conventions and nominating systems, which
At the national level, the focus on reform has seems to belie any simple catchall explanation.
been on: (1) the parties and the electoral
system; (2) legislative-executive relations; We find similar questions emerging in the study
and (3) internal reforms within the Congress. of Congress. Not only are members increasingly
There is one work which was published in 1976 concerned with devices such as constituency
which stands out as the major contribution to service to ensure their reelection, but there
the study of change, aptly titled, The Chang has been a series of internal reforms in both
ing American Voter, by Norman H. Nie, Sidney houses which somewhat paradoxically have
Verba, and John R. Petrocik. While there have strengthened the party system. The Democratic
been numerous studies of voting behavior in caucus and the Steering and Policy Committee in
the past decade, this volume is the first which the House are two notable examples, as are the
has attempted to put the framework underlying budget committees in both houses. Contrary to
The American Voter (1960) into historical per most expectations, each of these reforms has
spective. The findings of this book, in con been rather successful. The seniority norm is
trast to some other studies, are that there is no longer sacred and leaders who stray too far
xi i i
from the party line are in at least some real Nixon administration considered themselves lib
danger of losing their posts. Yet, Congress eral Democrats poses some critical questions
has also resisted some critical reforms, such which must be addressed by anyone who is con
as the reorganization of the House committee cerned with legislative-executive relations.
system (as detailed in the study by Roger Who actually makes policy and what do we mean
Davidson and Walter Oleszek, Congress Against by accountability?
Itself). As in the electoral system, we see
some movement toward a stronger role for par Studies of state and local government have moved
ties, but other reforms (such as the opening beyond simple description and aggregate data
up of caucus meetings) are aimed in quite the analysis to a broader concern for how decisions
opposite direction. MOst of the attention are made and whom they affect. Again, we see a
given to such studies has centered around why concern for reform, perhaps dictated by the in
certain reforms have either succeeded or creasingly shaky financial status of most sub
failed or how members of Congress employ national governments. The sacred cow of reve
constituency service to get reelected. Yet, nue sharing is now being reevaluated, and in
we are still in need of a more general theo deed, the entire program was almost not renewed
retical approach which might subsume these in 1976 by the Congress. Of particular inter
diverse patterns of change. Furthermore, in est to both reformers and practitioners have
a field which has become increasingly con been the studies of alternative systems of
cerned with policy analysis, we know very ra~s~ng revenue. Since the Supreme Court's
little about the impact of these reforms and ruling that financing public schools through
changing electoral patterns on the policy de property taxes is unconstitutional, state and
cisions reached by members of Congress. city administrators have been engaged in a
frantic search for alternative sources of reve
Having endured both Vietnam and Watergate, nue which can be raised by methods which are
students of the executive branch have turned politically acceptable. Other social services
their attention to the "imperial Presidency," are also being reevaluated, many through
identified for us six years ago by George studies of implementation of public policies.
Reedy. Two useful, although oversimplified, These studies are indeed mixed in quality and
studies which do much to correct this view of most lack an overall theoretical framework.
the Presidency are Joseph Califano's A Presi Yet, since the barrage of criticism which fol
dential Nation and Doris Kearns' Lyndon lowed the Coleman report, there has been a
Johnson and the American Dream. Here, we are noticeable reticence to examine the overall
drawn, as James David Barber suggested, to impact of programs on those groups which were
analyzing the men who have occupied the na the intended beneficiaries. A notable excep
tion's highest office and the ways in which tion, however, has been the study by Sar
personality dictates Presidential style. Yet, Levitan and Robert Taggart, The Promise of
both Califano and Kearns force us to consider Greatness, which reexamined the Great Society
the institutional barriers to a dominant Pres programs and concluded that many indeed were
idency as well as personality factors and also successful. Local and state governments will
the nation's need for strong leadership at the have to make some hard choices in the ensuing
top. The reforms in legislative-executive re years among competing programs, and it is
lationships have perhaps overstressed the po through this type of systematic analysis that
tential of legislation (such as the War Powers social science can be most useful in helping
Act and anti-impoundment provisions) to re the practitioner as well as the scholar.
store some balance between the legislative and
executive branches. Through such works as The states have become an increasingly salient
Louis Fisher's Presidential Spending Power, we area for study. We are seeing fewer aggregate
now know much more about the way national pol analyses of the effects of socioeconomic versus
icies are circumscribed. Yet, the reform lit political variables on policy outputs, but this
erature has not told us very much about what, is not necessarily a sad development. Instead,
if anything, should be done to reorganize the the focus has changed to an examination of the
executive branch. We do not even have any decision-makers themselves. Spurred on by the
clear-cut conceptions about what an ideal bal Citizens' Conference on State Legislatures,
ance of power should be or even of how much some scholars such as Ronald Hedlund and Keith
power over his own bureaucracy a President E. Hamm (Legislative Studies Quarterly) have
should have. The sobering study by Joel D. begun intensive state-level analyses of the
Aberbach and Bert Rockman in the American impact of reforms on the decision-making pro
Political Science Review which indicated that cess in the states. There has been a very
most high-level bureaucrats serving in the rapid growth in the number of surveys of state
xiv