Pub Date : 1982-12-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298203500410
M. Hennessy
E) VALUATION research was one of the largest growth industries in the social sciences during the 1970s. With the current decline in federal expenditures and resultant reductions in appropriation for applied research, we can expect an increased interest in performing technically sound and politically persuasive' evaluations to justify the maintenance of existing programs and to make planned social change efficient and cost effective. Under present economic and political conditions, bad and/or useless evaluations will not be tolerated or funded. Thus, the last few years have seen an increase in the literature about evaluation research methods. Fore-
{"title":"The End of Methodology? a Review Essay On Evaluation Research Methods","authors":"M. Hennessy","doi":"10.1177/106591298203500410","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298203500410","url":null,"abstract":"E) VALUATION research was one of the largest growth industries in the social sciences during the 1970s. With the current decline in federal expenditures and resultant reductions in appropriation for applied research, we can expect an increased interest in performing technically sound and politically persuasive' evaluations to justify the maintenance of existing programs and to make planned social change efficient and cost effective. Under present economic and political conditions, bad and/or useless evaluations will not be tolerated or funded. Thus, the last few years have seen an increase in the literature about evaluation research methods. Fore-","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"160 1","pages":"606 - 612"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1982-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77044822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1982-12-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298203500411
R. Strong
{"title":"Book Reviews : The Global Politics of Arms Sales. By ANDREW J. PIERRE. (Princeton: Princeton Univer sity Press, 1982. Pp. 352. $20.00.)","authors":"R. Strong","doi":"10.1177/106591298203500411","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298203500411","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"118 1","pages":"613 - 614"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1982-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85370405","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1982-12-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298203500406
R. Meadow
^N v 'EARLY a decade has passed since Watergate first emerged in the headlines. For most Americans, Watergate is indeed behind them. Still, it is instructive to return to Watergate, for it provides a good laboratory for examining the contribution of mass mediated political information to the political socialization process. Few events so pervaded the news media for so long. Now, with data emerging on the long-term implications of Watergate for the political system (Sigel and Hoskin, 1980), political scientists should investigate the roots of these implications as children, whose political values were largely shaped during the Watergate period, enter the voting population. In this paper, I shall examine which children were most affected by Watergate at the time-and who may have been scarred politically-by exploring the relative contributions of mass media information and personal maturation to the evaluation of the President during the crisis. In the past decade, researchers in both political science and communications (summarized by Kraus and Davis, 1976) have found the mass media to be important agents in the political socialization of children. Beyond providing express images of law enforcers, political figures, or even general power relationships through fictional programming, for example, television provides data on the real world in the form of news. Even where the news itself is used little by the politically maturing child, it often provides a stimulus for dinner-time discussion of political issues, concepts, or personalities. Beyond whatever role the news media play in setting the adult political agenda (Shaw and McCombs, 1977), they play a role as a source of political information in the news flow from parents to children. With respect to Watergate, studies by Hawkins, Pingree and Roberts (1975) and Chaffee and Becker (1975) demonstrated that children's exposure to news media had identifiable effects on young people's evaluations of the President. At the same time that researchers were demonstrating an interest in the role of mass media in the political socialization process, others were searching for theoretical explanations of the dynamics of political socialization. In particular, scholars from both political science (Bennet, 1975; Best, 1973; Friedman, 1977; Merelman, 1969; Patterson, 1979; Riccards, 1973) and communication (Becker, McCombs and McLeod, 1975) considered several psychological development theories as explanatory of the processes through which children come of age politically. These researchers argued that increments in the quantity and quality of political understanding are linked to progress along one or several psychological developmental continua; i.e., to advances made by the child in terms of cognitive skills, moral reasoning, or personality development and ego strength. Unfortunately, the recent interest in both mass media effects and the use of psychological concepts grew as separate strands of thought. Fresh ins
{"title":"Information and Maturation in Children's Evaluation of Government Leadership During Watergate","authors":"R. Meadow","doi":"10.1177/106591298203500406","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298203500406","url":null,"abstract":"^N v 'EARLY a decade has passed since Watergate first emerged in the headlines. For most Americans, Watergate is indeed behind them. Still, it is instructive to return to Watergate, for it provides a good laboratory for examining the contribution of mass mediated political information to the political socialization process. Few events so pervaded the news media for so long. Now, with data emerging on the long-term implications of Watergate for the political system (Sigel and Hoskin, 1980), political scientists should investigate the roots of these implications as children, whose political values were largely shaped during the Watergate period, enter the voting population. In this paper, I shall examine which children were most affected by Watergate at the time-and who may have been scarred politically-by exploring the relative contributions of mass media information and personal maturation to the evaluation of the President during the crisis. In the past decade, researchers in both political science and communications (summarized by Kraus and Davis, 1976) have found the mass media to be important agents in the political socialization of children. Beyond providing express images of law enforcers, political figures, or even general power relationships through fictional programming, for example, television provides data on the real world in the form of news. Even where the news itself is used little by the politically maturing child, it often provides a stimulus for dinner-time discussion of political issues, concepts, or personalities. Beyond whatever role the news media play in setting the adult political agenda (Shaw and McCombs, 1977), they play a role as a source of political information in the news flow from parents to children. With respect to Watergate, studies by Hawkins, Pingree and Roberts (1975) and Chaffee and Becker (1975) demonstrated that children's exposure to news media had identifiable effects on young people's evaluations of the President. At the same time that researchers were demonstrating an interest in the role of mass media in the political socialization process, others were searching for theoretical explanations of the dynamics of political socialization. In particular, scholars from both political science (Bennet, 1975; Best, 1973; Friedman, 1977; Merelman, 1969; Patterson, 1979; Riccards, 1973) and communication (Becker, McCombs and McLeod, 1975) considered several psychological development theories as explanatory of the processes through which children come of age politically. These researchers argued that increments in the quantity and quality of political understanding are linked to progress along one or several psychological developmental continua; i.e., to advances made by the child in terms of cognitive skills, moral reasoning, or personality development and ego strength. Unfortunately, the recent interest in both mass media effects and the use of psychological concepts grew as separate strands of thought. Fresh ins","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"7 1","pages":"539 - 553"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1982-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88079018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1981-09-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298103400304
R. Dagger
EW CONCEPTS in the history of political thought have proved so troublesome as Rousseau's notion of the general will. Rousseau must bear much of the blame for this, of course, for the discussion of the general will in his Social Contract is uncharacteristically terse and abstract. Troublesome as it has been, though, there is reason to believe that we are now approaching an adequate understanding of the general will. I say this because there seems to be growing agreement among Rousseau's commentators that the general will not only can be understood, but that it can best be understood in rationalistic terms.' Indeed, where explications once were couched in terms of "real" and "higher" wills, one is now more likely to find the general will explained in terms of the prisoners' dilemma and Paretooptimality.2 While I do not accept all of these rationalistic readings of the general will, I do share the general conviction that we can make sense of Rousseau's concept, and his argument, without resorting to metaphysics or psychology. What I shall offer here, accordingly, is in some respects only a variation on a theme now well known to students of Rousseau's political philosophy. It is an important variation nonetheless, for it enables us to reconcile passages in the Social Contract which otherwise appear to be contradictory. That, at least, is what I shall argue in this essay. I proceed in the following manner. First I set out a general account of what Rousseau means by "the general will" an account which resembles in its main lines, if not all its details, Brian Barry's analysis of the general will.3 This account is defended in the second part of the essay, where I show how it helps us to understand two of the more controversial aspects of Rousseau's argument in the Social Contract. In part three I extend this account (and provide the variation mentioned in the last paragraph) by drawing a distinction, implicit and almost unmarked in Rousseau's writings, between the general will and a general will. With the aid of this distinction, I argue, we can make sense of Rousseau's baffling and apparently contradictory remarks about voting. Once this is demonstrated, I conclude by raising some questions about the utility of the concept of the general will.
{"title":"Understanding the General Will","authors":"R. Dagger","doi":"10.1177/106591298103400304","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298103400304","url":null,"abstract":"EW CONCEPTS in the history of political thought have proved so troublesome as Rousseau's notion of the general will. Rousseau must bear much of the blame for this, of course, for the discussion of the general will in his Social Contract is uncharacteristically terse and abstract. Troublesome as it has been, though, there is reason to believe that we are now approaching an adequate understanding of the general will. I say this because there seems to be growing agreement among Rousseau's commentators that the general will not only can be understood, but that it can best be understood in rationalistic terms.' Indeed, where explications once were couched in terms of \"real\" and \"higher\" wills, one is now more likely to find the general will explained in terms of the prisoners' dilemma and Paretooptimality.2 While I do not accept all of these rationalistic readings of the general will, I do share the general conviction that we can make sense of Rousseau's concept, and his argument, without resorting to metaphysics or psychology. What I shall offer here, accordingly, is in some respects only a variation on a theme now well known to students of Rousseau's political philosophy. It is an important variation nonetheless, for it enables us to reconcile passages in the Social Contract which otherwise appear to be contradictory. That, at least, is what I shall argue in this essay. I proceed in the following manner. First I set out a general account of what Rousseau means by \"the general will\" an account which resembles in its main lines, if not all its details, Brian Barry's analysis of the general will.3 This account is defended in the second part of the essay, where I show how it helps us to understand two of the more controversial aspects of Rousseau's argument in the Social Contract. In part three I extend this account (and provide the variation mentioned in the last paragraph) by drawing a distinction, implicit and almost unmarked in Rousseau's writings, between the general will and a general will. With the aid of this distinction, I argue, we can make sense of Rousseau's baffling and apparently contradictory remarks about voting. Once this is demonstrated, I conclude by raising some questions about the utility of the concept of the general will.","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"56 12 1","pages":"359 - 371"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1981-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79752679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1981-09-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298103400303
J. Gunnell
T HHE PURPOSE of this essay is to present the basic elements of a theory of human action and to suggest their relevance for claims about political phenomena. Although it would be desirable to offer the analysis of action without an introduction and justification, there are at least two reasons why such a move might be problematical. First, this type of analysis, and even the idea of what is referred to here as "theory," does not have an accepted place within the disciplinary matrix of contemporary political science. Although my principal concern in this essay is neither to demonstrate the need for such a theory in political science nor to explore its possible implications for prevailing forms of research,1 a summary statement of the arguments and assumptions relating to such matters is required. Second, although the theory is in certain respects related to accounts of social scientific explanation that advocate what has been variously described as an interpretative, hermeneutical, or phenomenological mode of inquiry, there is a fundamental logical difference. It is a claim about action as a kind of phenomenon rather than about the explanation of action. This is a crucial distinction which, along with several other issues raised by this analysis, will be discussed briefly in Sections I and III. Section II presents the substance of the theory, but the argument is necessarily very compressed in this context.2
{"title":"Political Theory and the Theory of Action","authors":"J. Gunnell","doi":"10.1177/106591298103400303","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298103400303","url":null,"abstract":"T HHE PURPOSE of this essay is to present the basic elements of a theory of human action and to suggest their relevance for claims about political phenomena. Although it would be desirable to offer the analysis of action without an introduction and justification, there are at least two reasons why such a move might be problematical. First, this type of analysis, and even the idea of what is referred to here as \"theory,\" does not have an accepted place within the disciplinary matrix of contemporary political science. Although my principal concern in this essay is neither to demonstrate the need for such a theory in political science nor to explore its possible implications for prevailing forms of research,1 a summary statement of the arguments and assumptions relating to such matters is required. Second, although the theory is in certain respects related to accounts of social scientific explanation that advocate what has been variously described as an interpretative, hermeneutical, or phenomenological mode of inquiry, there is a fundamental logical difference. It is a claim about action as a kind of phenomenon rather than about the explanation of action. This is a crucial distinction which, along with several other issues raised by this analysis, will be discussed briefly in Sections I and III. Section II presents the substance of the theory, but the argument is necessarily very compressed in this context.2","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"78 1","pages":"341 - 358"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1981-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76795292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1981-09-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298103400309
Douglas G. Feig
VER SINCE 1884 when Woodrow Wilson's Congressional Government was first published, political scientists have been aware of the important role played by committees in the operation of the Congress.1 But until the early 1960s, this awareness tended to be of a rather general sort, centering primarily on the major part such committees played in the making of policy and the oversight of administration. Since then, however, there has been a greatly increased recognition of the dramatic differences among the many committees of the House and Senate. In particular, the works of Fenno, Manley and Jones stand out in this regard.2 The comparative study of congressional committees has answered many questions raised by political scientists, but it has also opened up for reexamination some matters which were previously thought to be fairly well understood. One such matter concerns the relationship between committee integration and committee partisanship. Fenno's early work on the House Education and Labor Committee clearly suggested that its excessive partisanship was at least partially responsible for its lack of integration.3 On the other hand, his study of the Appropriations Committees attributed their high levels of integration to their relative lack of partisanship, among other things.4 In both cases, committee integration and committee partisanship were found to be inversely related. But Manley's study of the House Ways and Means Committee found it to be both well integrated and highly partisan, although its partisanship was "restrained."5 This paper seeks confirmation of the findings of these two authors concerning the relationship between integration and partisanship, when examined with a methodology different from the ones they employed. Two committees are studied: the House Committees on Education and
自从1884年伍德罗·威尔逊的《国会政府》首次出版以来，政治学家们就已经意识到委员会在国会运作中所起的重要作用。但直到20世纪60年代初，这种意识往往是相当笼统的，主要集中在这些委员会在制定政策和监督行政方面所起的主要作用。然而，从那时起，人们越来越认识到众议院和参议院的许多委员会之间存在着巨大的差异。在这方面，Fenno, Manley和Jones的作品尤为突出国会委员会的比较研究回答了政治学家提出的许多问题，但它也为重新审查一些以前被认为相当了解的问题打开了大门。其中一个问题涉及委员会一体化和委员会党派关系之间的关系。芬诺在众议院教育和劳工委员会的早期工作清楚地表明，其过度的党派偏见至少是其缺乏整合的部分原因另一方面，他对拨款委员会的研究认为，除其他外，它们高度一体化的原因是相对缺乏党派关系在这两种情况下，委员会整合和委员会党派关系被发现是负相关的。但曼利对众议院筹款委员会(House Ways and Means Committee)的研究发现，该委员会既融合得很好，又高度党派化，尽管其党派之争是“克制的”。“5 .本文试图证实这两位作者在采用不同于他们所采用的方法考察一体化与党派关系时所得出的结论。研究了两个委员会:众议院教育委员会和众议院教育委员会
{"title":"Partisanship and Integration in Two House Committees: Ways and Means and Education and Labor","authors":"Douglas G. Feig","doi":"10.1177/106591298103400309","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298103400309","url":null,"abstract":"VER SINCE 1884 when Woodrow Wilson's Congressional Government was first published, political scientists have been aware of the important role played by committees in the operation of the Congress.1 But until the early 1960s, this awareness tended to be of a rather general sort, centering primarily on the major part such committees played in the making of policy and the oversight of administration. Since then, however, there has been a greatly increased recognition of the dramatic differences among the many committees of the House and Senate. In particular, the works of Fenno, Manley and Jones stand out in this regard.2 The comparative study of congressional committees has answered many questions raised by political scientists, but it has also opened up for reexamination some matters which were previously thought to be fairly well understood. One such matter concerns the relationship between committee integration and committee partisanship. Fenno's early work on the House Education and Labor Committee clearly suggested that its excessive partisanship was at least partially responsible for its lack of integration.3 On the other hand, his study of the Appropriations Committees attributed their high levels of integration to their relative lack of partisanship, among other things.4 In both cases, committee integration and committee partisanship were found to be inversely related. But Manley's study of the House Ways and Means Committee found it to be both well integrated and highly partisan, although its partisanship was \"restrained.\"5 This paper seeks confirmation of the findings of these two authors concerning the relationship between integration and partisanship, when examined with a methodology different from the ones they employed. Two committees are studied: the House Committees on Education and","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"5 4 1","pages":"426 - 437"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1981-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90245906","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1981-09-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298103400307
E. Wellhofer
O NN E OF THE most intriguing problems in the evolution of liberal democracies is their transformation from limited franchise regimes to mass suffrage polities. The dynamics of the problem and its consequences can be summarized as follows: Suffrage expansion and political mobilization coincided with social mobilization resulting from urbanization and industrialization. As social and economic grievances became political, pressures for suffrage expansion increased.1 These demands set in motion an "intriguing process of historical dialectics."2 The extension of suffrage increased greatly the potential for polarization in society, but enfranchisement also facilitated an organizational proliferation which reduced polarization by generating a myriad of cross-pressures. This long-term process narrowed alternatives in politics, fragmented interest organizations, and reduced the importance of electoral contests. The result was a lowering of political participation, the alienation of major segments of the citizenry, and the limitation of policy formulation to the bargaining process of major interest organizations, parties, and the bureaucracy. An analysis of the dynamics of the political incorporation of the newly enfranchised citizenry into national political life is important to our understanding the transition to mass politics and the stability of democratic institutions.
{"title":"The Political Incorporation of the Newly Enfranchised Voter: Organizational Encapsulation and Socialist Labor Party Development","authors":"E. Wellhofer","doi":"10.1177/106591298103400307","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298103400307","url":null,"abstract":"O NN E OF THE most intriguing problems in the evolution of liberal democracies is their transformation from limited franchise regimes to mass suffrage polities. The dynamics of the problem and its consequences can be summarized as follows: Suffrage expansion and political mobilization coincided with social mobilization resulting from urbanization and industrialization. As social and economic grievances became political, pressures for suffrage expansion increased.1 These demands set in motion an \"intriguing process of historical dialectics.\"2 The extension of suffrage increased greatly the potential for polarization in society, but enfranchisement also facilitated an organizational proliferation which reduced polarization by generating a myriad of cross-pressures. This long-term process narrowed alternatives in politics, fragmented interest organizations, and reduced the importance of electoral contests. The result was a lowering of political participation, the alienation of major segments of the citizenry, and the limitation of policy formulation to the bargaining process of major interest organizations, parties, and the bureaucracy. An analysis of the dynamics of the political incorporation of the newly enfranchised citizenry into national political life is important to our understanding the transition to mass politics and the stability of democratic institutions.","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"37 1","pages":"399 - 414"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1981-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82294447","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1981-09-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298103400308
David H. Everson
written that "millions of Americans may fail to become actively involved in the political process simply because they do not feel that there are adequate opportunities presently available to express their sentiments or to make their influence felt."1 Recently, there has been a movement to establish, by constitutional amendment, a national initiative which would allow citizens to propose and vote on legislation.2 One byproduct of such a reform could be increased voter involvement and participation. Of course, the U.S. has extensive experience with initiatives at the state level. This experience might give some clues to the answer to the question of whether a national initiative might spur citizen sense of involvement and therefore have a positive impact on voter turnout. This paper addresses that question via an analysis of the effects of initiatives in the states on voter turnout from 1960 to 1978.
{"title":"The Effects of Initiatives On Voter Turnout: a Comparative State Analysis","authors":"David H. Everson","doi":"10.1177/106591298103400308","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298103400308","url":null,"abstract":"written that \"millions of Americans may fail to become actively involved in the political process simply because they do not feel that there are adequate opportunities presently available to express their sentiments or to make their influence felt.\"1 Recently, there has been a movement to establish, by constitutional amendment, a national initiative which would allow citizens to propose and vote on legislation.2 One byproduct of such a reform could be increased voter involvement and participation. Of course, the U.S. has extensive experience with initiatives at the state level. This experience might give some clues to the answer to the question of whether a national initiative might spur citizen sense of involvement and therefore have a positive impact on voter turnout. This paper addresses that question via an analysis of the effects of initiatives in the states on voter turnout from 1960 to 1978.","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"21 1","pages":"415 - 425"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1981-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81326296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1981-09-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298103400312
Kevin V. Mulcahy
T HERE HAS BEEN a veritable explosion of literature on public policy and the arts in the past five years. While the effect of the blasts has not exactly ignited a firestorm of interest among political scientists, students of public policy-making and public policy-makers have become increasingly aware of public culture as a political and administrative issue. What is perhaps politically most significant about public culture is the speed with which the arts have become ensconced in the policy-making process. Less than twenty years ago a discussion of public support for culture would have been conjectural or historical; public arts agencies today are institutionalized dispensers of governmental patronage. What was once done by churches and courts is now done by administrative agencies in both the United States and Europe. If we do not have a federal "Department of Cultural Affairs," our network of arts agencies constitutes a cultural establishment. The best-known of the arts agencies is the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), which along with its less-glamorous sister agency, the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), was established in 1965. In the late 1960s, Congress established the Corporation of Public Broadcasting (CPB) as a conduit for federal funding to support public radio and television. (CPB, however, is prohibited from directly producing programming; that is a job for the Public Broadcasting Service and its member stations.) NEA, NEH, and CPB were each funded at about $150 million in 1980 and together make up the bulk of the cultural establishment. The federal government is also involved with the arts through lesser-known agencies such as the Museum Services Institute; various programs supported by the Department of Education, National Park Service and National Science Foundation; works commissioned for public buildings by the General Services Administration; the museum system supported by the Smithsonian Institution; the National Archives and Library of Congress; and the overseas cultural exchanges sponsored by the International Communication Agency. Some of the significance of public involvement on artistic production can be seen in two New Yorker cartoons. One of a few years ago shows a writer being visited by one of the Muses who whispers apologetically; "I don't have any inspiration today but
{"title":"Public Culture and the Public: a Review Article","authors":"Kevin V. Mulcahy","doi":"10.1177/106591298103400312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298103400312","url":null,"abstract":"T HERE HAS BEEN a veritable explosion of literature on public policy and the arts in the past five years. While the effect of the blasts has not exactly ignited a firestorm of interest among political scientists, students of public policy-making and public policy-makers have become increasingly aware of public culture as a political and administrative issue. What is perhaps politically most significant about public culture is the speed with which the arts have become ensconced in the policy-making process. Less than twenty years ago a discussion of public support for culture would have been conjectural or historical; public arts agencies today are institutionalized dispensers of governmental patronage. What was once done by churches and courts is now done by administrative agencies in both the United States and Europe. If we do not have a federal \"Department of Cultural Affairs,\" our network of arts agencies constitutes a cultural establishment. The best-known of the arts agencies is the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), which along with its less-glamorous sister agency, the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), was established in 1965. In the late 1960s, Congress established the Corporation of Public Broadcasting (CPB) as a conduit for federal funding to support public radio and television. (CPB, however, is prohibited from directly producing programming; that is a job for the Public Broadcasting Service and its member stations.) NEA, NEH, and CPB were each funded at about $150 million in 1980 and together make up the bulk of the cultural establishment. The federal government is also involved with the arts through lesser-known agencies such as the Museum Services Institute; various programs supported by the Department of Education, National Park Service and National Science Foundation; works commissioned for public buildings by the General Services Administration; the museum system supported by the Smithsonian Institution; the National Archives and Library of Congress; and the overseas cultural exchanges sponsored by the International Communication Agency. Some of the significance of public involvement on artistic production can be seen in two New Yorker cartoons. One of a few years ago shows a writer being visited by one of the Muses who whispers apologetically; \"I don't have any inspiration today but","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"40 1","pages":"461 - 470"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1981-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77785340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1981-09-01DOI: 10.1177/106591298103400305
Robert T. Roper
Y ITS OWN admission one of the most difficult questions the Supreme Court wrestles with is the ubiquitous conflict between a "free press" and a "fair trial" a conflict which the courts today still have problems resolving (i.e., while they are beginning to readmit cameras to the courtroom, they are allowing the exclusion of reporters from certain judicial proceedings).1 When addressing this conflict the Court generally looked at the time both prior to the empaneling of the jury, and during the trial itself. Although the Court is intolerant of agents that alter the tone of courtroom decorum in a way which precludes "a sober search for the truth," Estes v. Texas, 381 U.S. 532, 551 (1965), and in fact on at least three occasions reversed convictions of defendants who were victims of such poor courtroom management, Carroll v. Texas, 392 U.S. 644 (1968); Estes (1965); and Marshall v. U.S., 360 U.S. 310 (1959), this research is primarily concerned with the pre-trial stage. It is during this pre-trial stage that the Court performs a delicate balancing act between free press and a fair trial. The empaneling of an unbiased jury is vital to securing a fair trial: see Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333, 362 (1966). Since most publicity describing events surrounding the crime occurs prior to the selection of jurors, exposure to such information may prejudice potential jurors a prejudice that may be impossible to overcome if the juror is then called to serve. The nature of this prejudice may be influenced by both the intensity and tone of the coverage (e.g., the extent of coverage, the language in which the descriptions are framed, etc.), and the publication of damaging claims or facts (e.g., past criminal behavior, confessions, etc.). The Court sees the media's job as necessary to guard "against the miscarriage of justice by subjecting the police, prosecutors, and judicial processes to extensive public scrutiny and criticism."2 Therefore, rather than dictate to the media standards for the performance of their jobs, the judicial system provides several procedural safeguards to insure that the suspect is provided with a fair trial by unbiased jurors. These include: a change of venue to a jurisdiction where the publicity has not been so intense; a continuance, so that the publicity and its effects will have a chance to subside; an intensive voir dire to screen out those jurors who may have been affected by the news accounts; and the employment of simple and explicit judicial instructions concerning the inappropriateness of using information not presented during the trial. Where publicity was extensive, the Court has not responded favorably to defendants who fail to utilize those available protections. On other occasions the Court has contended that the implementation of these safeguards was sufficient to protect the defendant from the impact of prejudicial pretrial publicity (i.e., subsequently referred to as PPP). See Murphy v. Florida, 421
最高法院自己也承认，最高法院最难解决的问题之一是“新闻自由”与“公平审判”之间普遍存在的冲突，这是法院今天仍难以解决的冲突(即，当他们开始允许照相机进入法庭时，他们却允许记者被排除在某些司法程序之外)在处理这一冲突时，法院通常会考虑陪审团成员组成之前和审判期间的时间。尽管法院不能容忍代理人以某种方式改变法庭礼仪的基调，以排除“清醒地寻求真相”，埃斯蒂斯诉德克萨斯州案，381 U.S. 532, 551(1965)，事实上至少有三次推翻了被告的定罪，这些被告是这种糟糕的法庭管理的受害者，卡罗尔诉德克萨斯州案，392 U.S. 644 (1968);埃斯蒂斯(1965);和马歇尔诉美国案，360 U.S. 310(1959)，本研究主要关注审前阶段。正是在这个审判前阶段，法院在新闻自由和公平审判之间进行了微妙的平衡。公正陪审团的组成对于确保公正审判至关重要:参见Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333, 362(1966)。由于大多数有关犯罪事件的宣传都是在挑选陪审员之前进行的，因此接触到这些信息可能会对潜在陪审员产生偏见，如果陪审员随后被召去服务，这种偏见可能无法克服。这种偏见的性质可能受到报道的强度和语气(例如，报道的范围、描述的框架语言等)和破坏性主张或事实的发表(例如，过去的犯罪行为、供词等)的影响。法院认为，媒体的工作是必要的，以防止“通过使警察、检察官和司法程序受到广泛的公众监督和批评而导致司法不公”。因此，司法系统并没有规定媒体履行工作的标准，而是提供了一些程序保障，以确保嫌疑人得到公正的陪审员的审判。这些措施包括:将诉讼地点改为宣传力度较小的司法管辖区;延期，以便公众的关注及其影响有机会消退;进行密集的口头审查，以筛选出可能受到新闻报道影响的陪审员;以及使用简单而明确的司法指示，说明在审判中使用未提交的信息是不恰当的。在宣传广泛的情况下，法院不会对未能利用这些可用保护的被告作出有利的回应。在其他情况下，法院认为这些保障措施的实施足以保护被告免受审前宣传(即后来被称为PPP)的影响。参见Murphy v. Florida, 421
{"title":"The Gag Order: Asphyxiating the First Amendment","authors":"Robert T. Roper","doi":"10.1177/106591298103400305","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298103400305","url":null,"abstract":"Y ITS OWN admission one of the most difficult questions the Supreme Court wrestles with is the ubiquitous conflict between a \"free press\" and a \"fair trial\" a conflict which the courts today still have problems resolving (i.e., while they are beginning to readmit cameras to the courtroom, they are allowing the exclusion of reporters from certain judicial proceedings).1 When addressing this conflict the Court generally looked at the time both prior to the empaneling of the jury, and during the trial itself. Although the Court is intolerant of agents that alter the tone of courtroom decorum in a way which precludes \"a sober search for the truth,\" Estes v. Texas, 381 U.S. 532, 551 (1965), and in fact on at least three occasions reversed convictions of defendants who were victims of such poor courtroom management, Carroll v. Texas, 392 U.S. 644 (1968); Estes (1965); and Marshall v. U.S., 360 U.S. 310 (1959), this research is primarily concerned with the pre-trial stage. It is during this pre-trial stage that the Court performs a delicate balancing act between free press and a fair trial. The empaneling of an unbiased jury is vital to securing a fair trial: see Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333, 362 (1966). Since most publicity describing events surrounding the crime occurs prior to the selection of jurors, exposure to such information may prejudice potential jurors a prejudice that may be impossible to overcome if the juror is then called to serve. The nature of this prejudice may be influenced by both the intensity and tone of the coverage (e.g., the extent of coverage, the language in which the descriptions are framed, etc.), and the publication of damaging claims or facts (e.g., past criminal behavior, confessions, etc.). The Court sees the media's job as necessary to guard \"against the miscarriage of justice by subjecting the police, prosecutors, and judicial processes to extensive public scrutiny and criticism.\"2 Therefore, rather than dictate to the media standards for the performance of their jobs, the judicial system provides several procedural safeguards to insure that the suspect is provided with a fair trial by unbiased jurors. These include: a change of venue to a jurisdiction where the publicity has not been so intense; a continuance, so that the publicity and its effects will have a chance to subside; an intensive voir dire to screen out those jurors who may have been affected by the news accounts; and the employment of simple and explicit judicial instructions concerning the inappropriateness of using information not presented during the trial. Where publicity was extensive, the Court has not responded favorably to defendants who fail to utilize those available protections. On other occasions the Court has contended that the implementation of these safeguards was sufficient to protect the defendant from the impact of prejudicial pretrial publicity (i.e., subsequently referred to as PPP). See Murphy v. Florida, 421","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"1 1","pages":"372 - 388"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1981-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84759409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：