¹ Dahl, Robert A., Preface to Democratic Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956)Google Scholar, and Who Govens? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961).Google Scholar

² Truman, David B., The Governmental Process (New York: Knopf, 1951).Google Scholar

³ Braybrooke, David and Lindblom, Charles E., A Strategy of Decision (New York: The Free Press, 1963).Google Scholar

⁴ Banfield, Edward C., Political Influence (New York: The Free Press, 1961)Google Scholar; Polsby, Nelson W., Congress and the Presidency (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1964)Google Scholar; Wildavsky, Aaron B., The Politics of the Budgetary Process, 1st edn (Boston: Little, Brown, 1964).Google Scholar

⁵ Granisci, Antonio, Prison Notebooks (New York: International Publishers, 1971)Google Scholar; Miliband, Ralph. The State in Capitalist Society (New York: Basic Books, 1968)Google Scholar; Poulantzas, Nicos, Political Power and Social Classes (London: New Left Books and Sheed and Ward, 1973).Google Scholar

⁶ Lowi, Theodore M. Jr., The End of Liberalism, rev. edn (New York: Norton, 1979), original edition pub. in 1969Google Scholar; Olson, Mancur Jr., The Logic of Collective Action (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965)Google Scholar; Schattschneider, E. E., The Semisovereign People (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1960)Google Scholar; McConnell, Grant, Private Power and American Democracy (New York: Knopf, 1966).Google Scholar

⁷ Roettger, Walter B., ‘Strata and Stability: Reputations of American Political Scientists’, PS, 11 (Winter 1978), p. 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ Lindblom, Charles E., Politics and Markets (New York: Basic Books, 1977).Google Scholar

⁹ Prewitt, Kenneth and Stone, Alan, The Ruling Elites (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), p. 124.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Responsible political parties is a theme in The Semisovereign People and other works by Schallschneiden juridical democracy is the prescription to enhance governing by general rules put forth by Lowi, in The End of LiberalismGoogle Scholar; while at the end of Private Power and American Democracy McConnell calls for an active presidency and Supreme Court and for strong political parties at the national level of government.

¹¹ See Lowi, , The End of LiberalismGoogle Scholar; Olson, , The Logic of Collective ActionGoogle Scholar; Schattschneider, , The Semisorereign PeopleGoogle Scholar; and McConnell, , Private Power and American Democracy, as cited aboveGoogle Scholar. Also see Edelman, Murray, The Symbolic Uses of Politics (Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 1964)Google Scholar, Bernstein, Marver. Regulating Business by Independent Commission (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Fiorina, Morris P., Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977)Google Scholar. Proposition 10 is derived from Lowi, Theodore M. Jr., ‘American Business. Public Policy, Case Studies and Political Theory’, World Politics, XVI (1964), 677–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Proposition 11 is derived from McConnell, Grant, The Decline of Agrarian Democracy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1953)Google Scholar; McConnell, , Private Power and American DemocracyGoogle Scholar; Lowi, , The End of LiberalismGoogle Scholar; and Cater, Douglass, Power in Washington (New York: Random House. 1964)Google Scholar. Bernstein, , Regulating BusinessGoogle Scholar; Edelman, , The Symbolic UsesGoogle Scholar; McConnell, , Private PowerGoogle Scholar; and Lowi, Theodore M. Jr., At the Pleasure of the Mayor (New York: The Free Press, 1964) are sources for Proposition 12.Google Scholar

¹² Lowi, , ‘American Business, Public Policy’.Google Scholar

¹³ Lowi, . ‘American Business, Public Policy’Google Scholar. On incrementalism, see Lowi, , The End of Liberalism, pp. 211, 236.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Lowi, , The End of Liberalism, Chap. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See Ackerman, Bruce A. and Hassler, William T., Clean Coal/Dirty Air (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Wilson, James Q., The Politics of Regulation (New York: Basic Books, 1980), pp. 386–7.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Schlozman, Kay Lehman and Tierney, John T., Organized Interests and American Democracy (New York: Harper & Row, 1985), pp. 74–82Google Scholar; Walker, Jack L., ‘The Origins and Maintenance of Interest Groups in America’, American Political Science Review, LXXVII (1983), 390–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gais, Thomas L., Peterson, Mark A., and Walker, Jack L., ‘Interest Groups, Iron Triangles, and Representative Institutions in American National Government’, British Journal of Political Science, XIV (1984), 161–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁷ See Nordlinger, Eric A., On the Autonomy of the Democratic State (Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Krasner, Stephen D., ‘Approaches to the State: Alternative Conceptions and Historical Dynamics’, Comparative Politics, XVI (1984), 223–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁸ Skowronek, Stephen, Building a New American State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁹ Wilson, , The Politics of Regulation, Chap. 10.Google Scholar

²⁰ Heclo, Hugh, ‘Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment’, in King, Anthony, ed., The New American Political System (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 87–124.Google Scholar

²¹ Dahl, , Who Governs?, p. 5.Google Scholar

²² Dahl, . Who Governa?, p. 6.Google Scholar

²³ Krasner, , ‘Approaches to the State,’ pp. 227–8.Google Scholar

²⁴ Dahl, , Who Governs?, Chaps. 10, 15–17Google Scholar. Cf. Katzenstein, Peter J., Small States in World Markets (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1985), Chap. 3.Google Scholar

²⁵ See Braybrooke, and Lindblom, , A Strategy of DecisionGoogle Scholar; also see Lindblom, , ‘The Science of “Muddling Through”’, Public Administration Review, XIX (1959), 79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar; The Intelligence of Democracy (New York: Macmillan, 1965).Google Scholar

²⁶ This, of course, is no longer true in Lindblom's later book, Politics and Markets.

²¹ Wildavsky, , The Politics of the Budgetary ProcessGoogle Scholar. By now this book has appeared in four editions, each edition distinguished from its predecessor by a revision of the introduction and by a new chapter at the end of the book. This is significant, because later editions of this book reflect a much more pessimistic appraisal of the effectiveness of the American budgetary process than was stated in the first edition.

²⁰ Wildavsky, , The Politics of the Budgetary Process, pp. 47–62Google Scholar; Fenno, Richard F. Jr., ‘The House Appropriations Committee as a Political System: The Problem of Integration’, American Political Science Review, LVI (1962), 310–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁹ Wildavsky, Aaron, How to Limit Government Spending (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980).Google Scholar

³⁰ Stigler, George J., The Citizen and the State: Essays on Regulation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975)Google Scholar; Wildavsky, , How to Limit Government SpendingGoogle Scholar; Niskanen, William A., Bureaucracy and Representative Government (Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1971).Google Scholar

³¹ Moore, Barrington Jr., Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Boston: Beacon, 1967)Google Scholar; Huntington, Samuel P., Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1968).Google Scholar

³² Wilson, , The Politics of Regulation, Chaps. 1–9.Google Scholar

³³ Wilson, , The Politics of Regulation, pp. 364–72.Google Scholar

³⁴ Wilson, , The Politics of Regulation, Chaps. 5, 7.Google Scholar

³⁵ See also McFarland, Andrew S., ‘Groups Without Government: The Politics of Mediation’, in Cigler, Allan J. and Loomis, Burdett A., eds. Interest Group Politics, 2nd edn (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1986), pp. 289–302.Google Scholar

³⁶ Propositions 1, 2 and 3 are derived from Wilson, , The Politics of Regulation, Chap. 10Google Scholar. For Proposition 3, see also Peterson, Paul E., Rabe, Barry G., and Wong, Kenneth K., When Federalism Works (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1986)Google Scholar. For Proposition 5, see Selznick, Philip, Leadership in Administration (New York: Harper & Row, 1957)Google Scholar and Redford, Emmette S., Democracy in the Administrative State (New York: Oxford University Press, 1969), Chap. 5Google Scholar; Ripley, Randall B. and Franklin, Grace A., Congress, the Bureaucracy, and Public Policy, 3rd edn (Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press, 1984), Chap. 1Google Scholar. Proposition 8: Moe, Terry M., ‘Control and Feedback in Economic Regulation: The Case of the NLRB’, American Political Science Review, LXXIX (1985), 1094–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Proposition 10: Derthick, Martha and Quirk, Paul J., The Politics of Deregulation (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1985)Google Scholar; Proposition 13: McCarthy, John D. and Zald, Mayer N., ‘Resource Mobilization and Social Movements’, American Journal of Sociology, LXXXII (1977), 1212–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Proposition 14: Heclo, , ‘Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment’Google Scholar; Proposition 16: Schmitter, Philippe C., ‘Still the Century of Corporatism?’ Review of Politics, XXXVI (1974), 85–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stein, Katzen. Small States in World MarketsGoogle Scholar; Proposition 18: Walker, , ‘The Origins and Maintenance of Interest Groups in America’Google Scholar; Rourke, Francis E., Bureaucracy, Politics and Public Policy, 3rd edn (Boston, Mass.: Little, Brown, 1984), pp. 48–66.Google Scholar

³⁷ Kaufman, Herbert, The Forest Ranger (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1960), p. 226.Google Scholar

³⁸ Wilson, , The Politics of Deregulation, pp. 389–90.Google Scholar

³⁹ Fritschler, A. Lee, Smoking and Politics, 3rd edn (Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1983).Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Culhane, Paul J., Public Lands Politics (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Clarke, Jeanne Nienaber and McCool, Daniel, Staking Out the Terrain: Power Differentials Among Natural Resource Management Agencies (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1985), 107–22Google Scholar; Miller, Tim R., ‘Changes in the Utility of the Subsystem Model for Public Policy Analysis: The Status of Water Policy Making in the US’, prepared for delivery at the 1985 annual meeting of the American Political Science AssociationGoogle Scholar; Davis, Charles and Davis, Sandra, ‘Analyzing the Public Lands Subsystem’, prepared for delivery at the 1986 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Skowronek, , Building a New American State.Google Scholar

⁴² McFarland, Andrew S., ‘Public Interest Lobbies Versus Minority Faction’, in Cigler, Allan J. and Loomis, Burden A., eds, Interest Group Politics, 1st edn (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1983), pp. 324–53.Google Scholar

⁴³ McCarthy, and Zald, , ‘Resource Mobilization and Social Movements’.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ McAdam, Doug, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1939–1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Klein, Ethel, Gender Politics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁵ Heclo, , ‘Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment’, p. 105.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ McFarland, Andrew S., Public Interest Lobbies: Decision Making on Energy (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1976), pp. 6–12Google Scholar, and Common Cause (Chatham, NJ: Chatham House, 1984), pp. 40–3.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Walker, , ‘The Origins and Maintenance of Interest Groups in America’.Google Scholar