Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T16:00:26.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Representation, Accountability, and Efficiency in Divided Party Control of Government

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

James A. Thurber
James A. Thurber*
Affiliation:
American University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Symposium
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , December 1991 , pp. 653 - 657
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1991

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

Alt, James E. and Stewart, Charles H. III. 1990. “Parties and the Deficit: Some Historical Evidence.” Paper prepared for the Conference on Political Economy, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Brady, David R., and Fiorina, Morris P. 1991. “The Marginals Never Vanished?” British Journal of Political Science, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Bond, Jon R. and Fleisher, Richard. 1990. The President in the Legislative Arena. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cutler, Lloyd N. 1989. “Now Is the Time for All Good Men…” William and Mary Law Review 30: 387–402.Google Scholar
Cutler, Lloyd N. 1988. “Some Reflections about Divided Government.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 18: 489–90.Google Scholar
Davidson, Roger H. 1991. “The Presidency and Three Eras of the Modern Congress.” In Thurber, James A., ed., Divided Democracy: Cooperation and Conflict Between the President and Congress. Washington, DC: CQ Press, pp. 61–78.Google Scholar
Destler, I. M. 1985. “Executive-Congressional Conflict in Foreign Policy: Explaining It, Coping with It.” In Dodd, Lawrence C. and Oppenheimer, Bruce I., eds., Congress Reconsidered? Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, George C. III. 1989. At the Margins: Presidential Leadership of Congress. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1990. “An Era of Divided Government.” In Cain, Bruce and Peele, Gillian, eds., Developments in American Politics. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Flanigan, William H. and Zingale, Nancy H. 1991. Political Behavior of the American Electorate. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1991. “Explaining Divided Government: Why Can't the Republicans Win the House?” PS: Political Science & Politics XXIV, No. 4 (December).Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1990. The Electoral Origins of Divided Government: Competition in U.S. House Elections, 1946–1988. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Ladd, Everett C. 1990. “Public Opinion and the ‘Congress Problem.’” Public Interest (Summer): 66–67.Google Scholar
Light, Paul. 1981. “Passing Nonincremental Policy: Presidential Influence in Congress, Kennedy to Carter.” Congress & the Presidency 9 (Winter 81–82): 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 1991. Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking, and Investigations, 1946–1990. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mezey, Michael L. 1991a. “Congress with the U.S. Presidential System.” In Thurber, James A., ed., Divided Democracy: Cooperation and Conflict Between the President and Congress. Washington, DC: CQ Press, pp. 9–37.Google Scholar
Mezey, Michael L. 1991b. “The Legislature, the Executive, and Public Policy: The Futile Quest for Congressional Power.” In Thurber, James A., ed., Divided Democracy: Cooperation and Conflict Between the President and Congress. Washington, DC: CQ Press, pp. 123–44.Google Scholar
Ornstein, Norman J., Mann, Thomas E., and Malbin, Michael J. 1990. Vital Statistics on Congress: 1989–1990. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Pfiffner, James P. 1991. “Divided Government and the Problem of Governance.” In Thurber, James A., ed., Divided Democracy: Cooperation and Conflict Between the President and Congress. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Sigelman, Lee. 1979. “A Reassessment of the Two Presidencies Thesis.” Journal of Politics 41 (November): 1195–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skowronek, Stephen. 1984. “Presidential Leadership in Political Time.” In Nelson, Michael, ed., The Presidency and the Political System. Washington, DC: CQ Press, pp. 87–132.Google Scholar
Sundquist, James L. 1986. Constitutional Reform and Effective Government. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
Thurber, James A. 1980. “The Crisis of Competence in Our National Government.” Political Science Quarterly 95: 183–208.Google Scholar
Thurber, James A. 1991a. “The Impact of Budget Reform on Presidential and Congressional Governance.” In Thurber, James A., ed., Divided Democracy: Cooperation and Conflict Between the President and Congress. Washington, DC: CQ Press, pp. 145–70.Google Scholar
Thurber, James A. 1991b. “Introduction: The Roots of Divided Democracy.” In Thurber, James A., ed., Divided Democracy: Cooperation and Conflict Between the President and Congress. Washington, DC: CQ Press, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Thurber, James A. 1991c. “New Rules for an Old Game: Zero-Sum Budgeting in the Post-reform Congress.” In Davidson, Roger H., ed., The Postreform Congress. New York: St. Martin's Press, pp. 257–78.Google Scholar
Thurber, James A. and Durst, Samantha L. 1991. “Delay, Deadlock, and Deficits: Evaluating Proposals for Congressional Budget Reform.” In Lynch, Thomas D., ed., Federal Budget and Financial Management Reform. Westport, CT: Quorum Books, pp. 31–52.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron. 1966. “The Two Presidencies.” Trans-Action 4 (December): 7–14.Google Scholar