Bøger i Cambria Politics, Institutions, and Public Policy in America Series serien

The twenty years since 1995 have seen their share of landmark events. Among them a contested presidential election result (2000), a terrorist attack on U.S. soil (2001), the beginning of a war in Iraq (2003), economic calamity (2008), the election and reelection of the nation s first African American president (2008, 2012), two changes in party control of the presidency, three changes in party control of the House (including the first Republican majority in 40 years as a result of the 1994 congressional elections), and five changes in party control of the Senate. Throughout these volatile times, one theme stands out: political polarization has characterized American politics, creating gridlock in Washington and breeding distrust of government among the nation s citizens. Evidence of polarization abounds. The Pew Research Center found substantial overlap in Congress between liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats in the 1970s. Those days are gone. By the 2011-2012 congressional term, the common ground had melted away the most liberal Republican was more conservative than the most conservative Democrat. Moreover, the partisan divide reflects polarization throughout the country. A 2014 poll of 10,000 adults found that Republicans and Democrats are further apart ideologically than at any point in recent history. The harm to our politics can be measured in the negative attitudes Americans hold about our governing institutions. In early 2015, more people disapproved (51.5 percent) of President Obama s performance than approved (44.0 percent). The news was worse for Congress. More than 72 percent of those polled disapproved of the job Congress was doing. Taken together, the presidential and congressional job ratings help explain why 60 percent believed the country was on the wrong track. Few first-hand accounts from those who witnessed and participated in these events currently exist. Their experiences and evaluations of trends and events, however, not only help us understand the dynamics and impact of partisanship over two decades but also suggest possible remedies. This book provides a personal perspective from one of a very few individuals who served both in Congress and in a presidential Cabinet during these tumultuous times. LaHood s account covers his 14 years in Congress with 10 chapters centered on four pivotal events. The first relates to the Gingrich Revolution when Republicans seized control of the House in 1995. As a former staffer to House Republican leader Robert H. Michel, LaHood occupied a unique vantage point as his party won and eventually lost their majority amidst the intrigue of intraparty leadership battles and increasing confrontation between the two political parties. The second series of events deals directly with the decline of civility in the House which accompanied the rise in acrimonious partisanship. LaHood organized and led four House retreats in an ultimately unsuccessful effort to understand the causes of, and remedies for, the increasingly dysfunctional conduct of the House s business. The lessons learned then about the prospects for promoting change in the culture of Congress remain current. The third defining episode: LaHood presided during House debate over President Bill Clinton s impeachment in 1998. His story also includes details on the collapse of the House Republican leadership in that period. The fourth event relates to Congress s investigation of 9/11 during which LaHood sat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. As the only elected Republican selected for President Obama s Cabinet, LaHood sought to bridge the partisan divide between the new Democratic administration and Republicans on Capitol Hill. It proved to be a struggle compounded by the president s governing style and Republican intransigence. President Obama s promise to govern in a bipartisan manner went unrealized, in spite of his attempts, for reasons LaHood addresses in this book. The book includes reproductions of White House photographs and archival materials.

Formed in 1985 as a political action committee (PAC) to provide select female Democratic candidates with seed money to run for federal office, today EMILY s List is much more than a women s PAC. Over the past twenty-five years, a political entrepreneur Ellen Malcolm, a cadre of liberal feminist activists, and thousands of liberal feminist women and men have transformed EMILY s List into a multi-pronged influence organization that has changed the face of U.S. Congress and the American political landscape. In 2008 EMILY s List brought in over $34 million from more than 10,000 large donors and an untold number of small donors; for the first time the Center for Responsive Politics placed EMILY s List on their list of heavy hitters. The president and founder of EMILY s List, Ellen Malcolm, is considered one of the top Democratic strategists in the country. But scholars, especially those outside of women and politics, continue to view EMILY s List as simply a women s PAC, albeit an important one. While acknowledging that it has been a force in making women competitive in the early stages of congressional campaigns and its bundling prowess, there has been little if any attempt to place EMILY s List within the broader literature of campaign finance or congressional elections. While bundling may have put ELIST on the map in the late 1980s, in 2008 bundling was but one tool in EMILY s List s arsenal. Over the past quarter of a century, EMILY s List transformed from a women s PAC/donor network to a multi-pronged influence organization that strategically uses its resources to aid pro-choice Democratic women in their quest for public office. EMILY s List has created and maximized on political opportunities in such a way that it now stands as a political powerhouse. Those who have underestimated it as a narrow women s organization, have also largely underestimated the important role EMILY s List played in helping transform the character of the Democratic Party in Congress and helping bring about the Party s dramatic resurgence to power. This study is the first examination of the growth and transformation of EMILY s List from its inception in 1985 through the 2008 election cycle. Relying on interviews with organization staff, founding members, and members of Congress, it illuminates the ways in which the organization s origin and mission are firmly rooted in the goals and activities of the liberal feminist women s movement of the 1970s. The successes and failures of this movement set the stage for the creation of EMILY s List. Using qualitative and quantitative data, the study traces the organization s evolution from its early days as a PAC to its transformation into a multi-pronged influence organization that is a PAC, but also functions as an interest group, a party adjunct, and a campaign organization. The book explores the membership of the organization over time, highlighting EMILY s List s efforts to pull in new members and retain its loyal base. The book also explores how the organization has overcome women s reticence to contribute and how that has helped it become so influential in the political sphere. The last part of the book examines the organization s influence vis- -vis the endorsement process, which highlights the organization s multi-pronged strategy. It ends with a discussion of the organization s endorsement of Hillary Rodham Clinton s presidential bid in 2008, and what the 2008 election meant for the future of EMILY s List. This book would be appropriate for a variety of courses including courses on women and politics, Congress and congressional elections, campaign and elections courses, parties and interest group courses, and campaign finance courses. This book will be accessible and appropriate for undergraduates and graduate students, as well as researchers and practitioners. It combines historical narrative, which makes it accessible to students, with original interviews and empirical analysis, which appeals to faculty wishing to introduce students to cutting edge research efforts in political science.

U.S. farm bills are home to the nation s primary policies for agriculture, land use, and conservation. Although often outside the public spotlight, many of these policies are crucial to how land and food are managed in this country from food stamp programs for low-income households to environmental conservation for natural resources to the often controversial commodity subsidy programs to support farmers. Every five to seven years when the farm bill comes up for reauthorization, policymakers, interest groups, and the public spend months and often years advocating, questioning, and debating farm bill provisions. Typically when the new farm bill emerges, it appears expanded and adjusted, but rarely radically reformed. Early in debates over the 2008 farm bill, however, this norm of incremental policy change seemed to be cracking. International trade proposals, budget constraints, and new tides of public opinion brought proposals to the table for drastically reforming commodity subsidies. But as the situational and cultural context surrounding farm bill debates changed, so too did prospects for farm bill reform. In the end, influenced by an emerging focus on biofuels and discourses of national security, the 2008 farm bill settled back into a more typical incremental policy trajectory. Despite its ultimate conformity to the norms of incremental policymaking, the 2008 farm bill s flirtation with radical policy reform makes it an interesting empirical case for studying processes of policy change and stability. Following the trajectory of the 2008 farm bill debates as it unfolded provides an opportunity to examine those factors political, economic, cultural and otherwise that typically combine to facilitate or forestall policy change. In this case, biofuels became a prominent driving force in debates in part because they helped policymakers sidestep earlier controversies over more radical farm bill reform. Alongside a decline in trade pressure to reform subsidies, increased biofuels production raised crop prices, alleviated budgetary pressures, and inspired support for commodity production in the name of national security. Examining the gains and misses for conservation in the 2008 farm bill also sheds light on agricultural sustainability prospects embedded in farm policy. In this case, the emphasis on biofuels during farm bill debates both threatened conservation with the prospect of large-scale corn ethanol production, and also shifted public focus away from reforms that might have improved agriculture s environmental and social footprint. At the same time, the 2008 farm bill did introduce some new prospects for environmentally- and socially-sustainable agricultural policies in the longer term. In examining the reasons for the 2008 farm bill s approach to and then retreat from rapid policy change, Nadine Lehrer guides us through ideological conflicts over world trade, renewable energy, and sustainable agriculture as embedded in U.S. farm policy debates. This book locates these debates within the historical context of farm bills over time, providing a concise history of agricultural policy dynamics as they relate to current issues. The book also integrates complementary theoretical perspectives from the policy change and social movement literatures, and in particular makes a case for incorporating discourse analysis into studies of policy change and policy stability. Integrating theory and history with a multidisciplinary perspective on changing situational drivers, interest group struggles, and Congressional politics, Lehrer uses the farm bill as an illustrative case for illuminating U.S. political processes and implications. This is an important work for students and scholars of the U.S. political system, especially those focused on agricultural policy, sustainability and environmental conservation, theory and methods of policy analysis, and the intersections of policy and culture.