Deliberative Choices: Debating Public Policy in Congress. By Gary Mucciaroni and Paul J. Quirk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006. 296p. $50.00 cloth, $20.00 paper.

Gary Mucciaroni and Paul Quirk have done the field a service by reminding us that Congress is a deliberative body, even if it is not always a good deliberative body. The authors foreshadow their findings, stating: “Congressional debate is only moderately realistic and informed. Listeners encounter a considerable volume of distortions, omissions, and even falsehoods, with apparent potential to mislead” (p. x). They base this conclusion on a study of effects claims made during three significant policy debates: Welfare Reform in 1995 and 1996, the Estate Tax Repeal in 1999 and 2000, and the Telecommunication Deregulation Act of 1996. Effects claims are claims made during debate about the likely effects of the legislation or amendment under consideration: Reforming welfare will reduce illegitimate births; current tax rates depress incentives to invest; deregulation will help the telecommunications industry grow. The heavy lifting in the book comes from the authors' assessments of the validity of these effects claims (and rebuttals) based on contemporary knowledge of the issues that would have been available to members of Congress.