The Decline And Resurgence Of Congress

"Solid ground for optimism as well as cause for foreboding." So James L. Sundquist views the outcome of the struggle by the Congress in the 1970s to recapture powers and responsibilities that in preceding decades it had surrendered to a burgeoning presidency. The resurgence of the Congress began in 1973, in its historic constitutional clash with President Nixon. For half a century before that time, the Congress had acquiesced in its own decline vis-à-vis the presidency, or had even initiated it, by building the presidential office as the center of leadership and coordination in the U.S. government and organizing itself not to initiate and lead but to react and follow. But the angry confrontation with President Nixon in the winter of 1972-73 galvanized the Congress to seek to regain what it considered its proper place in the constitutional scheme. Within a short period, it had created a new congressional budget process, prohibited impoundment of appropriated funds, enacted the War Powers Resolution, intensified oversight of the executive, extended the legislative veto over a wide range of executive actions, and vastly expanded its staff resources. The Decline and Resurgence of Congress, after reviewing relations between president and Congress over two centuries, traces the long series of congressional decisions that created the modern presidency and relates these to certain weaknesses that the Congress recognized in itself. It then recounts the events that marked the years of resurgence and evaluates the results. Finally, it analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the new Congress and appraises its potential for leadership and coordination.

Powerful cross-currents of both decline and resurgence have been affecting American political parties over the past several decades. Is the era of decline that began in the late 1960s over and are the parties in a new era of rebuilding? In what direction are the parties headed and what does it mean for a healthy and well-functioning democracy? American Political Parties brings together a distinguished team of contributors to explore these questions. Students are exposed to original, "state-of-the-art" research on the parties that is written to be accessible and engaging. Presenting both historical and contemporary material on the changing U.S. parties, the book offers a balanced portrait and a wide variety of views concerning the continuing weaknesses of the parties and their concurrent signs of revitalization. Essays examine three important elements of parties—the parties in the mass public, the parties as electoral and political organizations, and the parties as governing groups. Two themes recur throughout—the first deals with party change (specifically realignment and dealignment) and the second with party responsibility in a democratic government. The concluding chapter places the contibutors' various findings and viewpoints in perspective. It offers several theories to help explain why the parties seem to be following their dual paths of development and considers the implications of this state of affairs for the future of American democracy.

Challenging dominant assumptions in international relations, Altered States demonstrates that national political institutions change more frequently--and less dramatically--than is commonly thought and with important consequences for the political landscape. Combining theory with solid empirical research--including archival evidence and interviews--the contributors explore the causes and consequences of institutional transformation in the United States, Western and Eastern Europe, Russia and the former Soviet Republics, and Cuba. Altered States highlights the dynamic and interactive relationship between national political institutions and reform-minded policy entrepreneurs, a perspective that will interest scholars and policy makers alike.

Nicol Rae's engaging account of the Republican revolutionaries' freshman year in Congress persuasively demonstrates that the precepts set forth by Madison in Federalist 10 and 51 are still in force in our remarkably stable political system. The 73 Republican freshmen who entered the House of Representatives after the 1994 election were a well-organized group with majority status and a commitment to change. This book examines the extent to which they were successful in redirecting policy and reforming the institutions of representative government -- and the extent to which those same institutions moderated, and even frustrated, efforts to introduce radical, rapid -- indeed revolutionary -- change. Contrasts are drawn both with the role of the Republican freshmen in the Senate and with the power of the President as manifested in the 1995-96 budget battle. The book is based on interviews conducted by the author when he was an APSA Congressional Fellow in the offices of Rep. George P. Radanovich, president of the freshman Republican class, and Sen. Thad Cochran, chairman of the Senate Republican Conference.

Controls on the bureaucracy through administrative due process and presidential and congressional prerogatives are the focus of this book. The author examines these controls and assesses the trade-offs among them.

First published in 1990, Laws, Men and Machines is an original interpretation of the lasting influence that Newtonian mechanics has had on the design and operation of the American political system. The author argues that it is this mechanistic tradition that now instinctively shapes the way we conceive of, analyse, and evaluate American politics, and that the Newtonian conception of the world still finds expression in the 'checks and balances' of the American system.

Examines the growth of obstacles to legislative success since the 1960s in the U.S. House of Representatives.

In the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States launched initiatives that test the limits of international human rights law. The indefinite detention and torture of detainees at Guantánamo Bay, targeted killing, and mass surveillance require an expansion of executive authority that negates the rule of law. In Permanent State of Emergency, Ryan Alford establishes that the ongoing failure to address human rights abuses is a symptom of the most serious constitutional crisis in American history. Instead of curbing the increase in executive power, Congress and the courts facilitated the breakdown of the nation’s constitutional order and set the stage for presidential supremacy. The presidency, Alford argues, is now more than imperial: it is an elective dictatorship. Providing both an overview and a systematic analysis of the new regime, he objectively demonstrates that it does not meet even the minimum requirements of the rule of law. At this critical juncture in American democracy, Permanent State of Emergency alerts the public to the structural transformation of the state and reiterates the importance of the constitutional limits of the American presidency.