Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:27:46.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Political Opposition in the United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Nelson W. Polsby
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

SURELY IN THE MANUFACTURE OF VARIETIES OF PEACEABLE AND legitimate political opposition the American political system leads the world, and from a comparative perspective the United States is therefore extremely atypical. This essay will review briefly some of the more familiar ways in which political opposition in the United States is expressed and encouraged, will consider some of the consequences for a political system so rich in opportunities for opposition, and in conclusion will discuss changes in patterns of opposition over the last 30 years.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , October 1997 , pp. 511 - 521
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 James Madison, Federalist Papers, 10, ‘The…causes of faction cannot be removed and… relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects’.

2 US Constitution, Article V: ‘… no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate’.

3 See Kurland, Philip B., Watergate and the Constitution, Chicago, III., University of Chicago Press, 1978.Google Scholar

4 US Constitution, Article I, Section 3. ‘Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law’.

5 See Berger, Raoul, Impeachment, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1973.Google Scholar

6 Neustadt, Richard, Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents, New York, Free Press, 1990, p. 29.Google Scholar

7 Morton Grodzins., ‘Centralization and Decentralization in the American Federal System’, in Goldwin, Robert A. (ed.), A Nation of States: Essays on the American Federal System by Morton Grodzins (and others), Chicago, Ill., Rand McNally, 1963, p. 3.Google Scholar

8 The classic statement is Truman, , ‘Federalism and the Party System’, in MacMahon, Arthur W. David, B. (ed.), Federalism: Mature and Emergent, New York, Doubleday, 1955, pp. 115–36.Google Scholar

9 Most recently, Timmons, v. Twin Cities New Party, 73 F.3d 196, reversed by Supreme Court on 28 04 1997 , Docket No. 95–1608.Google Scholar

10 Rae, Douglas W., The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws, New Haven, Conn., Yale University Press, 1967.Google Scholar

11 Behr, Steven J. Rosenstone, , Lazarus, Roy L. and Edward, H., Third Parties in America: Citizen Response to Major Party Failure, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1984.Google Scholar

12 Greenstone, J. David, Labor in American Politics, New York, Knopf, 1969;Google Scholar Acheson, Dean, A Democrat Looks at His Party, New York, Harper, 1955.Google Scholar

13 US Constitution, First Amendment: ‘Congress shall make no law… abridging… the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances’.

14 Bennett, Stephen Earl and Resnick, David, ‘The Implications of Nonvoting for Democracy in the US’, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 34, 08 1990, pp. 771–801;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Wolfinger, , Glass, Raymond E. and Squire, Peverill David, P., ‘Predictors of Electoral Turnout An International Comparison’, Policy Studies Review, Vol. 9, Spring, 1990, pp. 551–74;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Miller, Arthur H., ‘Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964’, and Jack Citrin., ‘Comment’, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 6B, 09 1974, pp. 951–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 Polsby, Nelson W., Political Innovation in America: The Politics of Policy Initiation, New Haven, Conn., Yale University Press, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Polsby, Nelson W., Consequences of Party Reform, New York, Oxford University Press, 1983.Google Scholar