The history that was made and continues to be made within and without the walls of the Georgia Capitol is captured in this stunning, fully illustrated volume that chronicles the major periods in the Capitol's history and the building's design and construction, from 1885 to the present day.
The authors demonstrate that state policies are highly responsive to public opinion through the analysis of state policies from the 1930s to the present.
No environmental issue triggers such feelings of hopelessness as global climate change. Many areas of the world, including regions of the United States, have experienced a wide range of unusually dramatic weather events recently. Much climate change analysis forecasts horrors of biblical proportions, such as massive floods, habitat loss, species loss, and epidemics related to warmer weather. Such accounts of impending disaster have helped trigger extreme reactions, wherein some observers simply dismiss global climate change as, at the very worst, a minor inconvenience requiring modest adaptation. It is perhaps no surprise, therefore, that an American federal government known for institutional gridlock has accomplished virtually nothing in this area in the last decade. Policy inertia is not the story of this book, however. Statehouse and Greenhouse examines the surprising evolution of state-level government policies on global climate change. Environmental policy analyst Barry Rabe details a diverse set of innovative cases, offering detailed analysis of state-level policies designed to combat global warming. The book explains why state innovation in global climate change has been relatively vigorous and why it has drawn so little attention thus far. Rabe draws larger potential lessons from this recent flurry of American experience. Statehouse and Greenhouse helps to move debate over global climate change from bombast to the realm of what is politically and technically feasible.
“It’s the statehouses, stupid.” Laboratories of Autocracy shows that far more than the high-profile antics of politicians like Marjorie Taylor Greene or Jim Jordan—and yes, even bigger than Donald Trump’s "Big Lie”—it’s anonymous, often corrupt politicians in statehouses across the country who pose the greatest dangers to American democracy. Because these statehouses no longer operate as functioning democracies, these unknown politicians have all the incentive to keep doing greater damage, and can not be held accountable however extreme they get. This has driven steep declines in states like Ohio and others across the country. And collectively, it’s placed American democracy in its greatest peril since the dawn of the Jim Crow era. But Pepper doesn’t stop there. He lays out a robust pro-democracy agenda outlining how everyone from elected officials to business leaders to everyday citizens can fight back.
Since so few people appear knowledgeable about public affairs, one might question whether collective policy preferences revealed in opinion surveys accurately convey the distribution of voices and interests in a society. This study, the first comprehensive treatment of the relationship between knowledge, representation, and political equality in opinion surveys, suggests some surprising answers. Knowledge does matter, and the way it is distributed in society can cause collective preferences to reflect disproportionately the opinions of some groups more than others. Sometimes collective preferences seem to represent something like the will of the people, but frequently they do not. Sometimes they rigidly enforce political equality in the expression of political viewpoints, but often they do not. The primary culprit is not any inherent shortcoming in the methods of survey research. Rather, it is the limited degree of knowledge held by ordinary citizens about public affairs. Accounting for these factors can help survey researchers, journalists, politicians, and concerned citizens better appreciate the pitfalls and possibilities for using opinion polls to represent the people s voice.
Studies of social movements and of political parties have usually treated them as separate and distinct. In fact they are deeply intertwined. Social movements often shape electoral competition and party policies; they can even give rise to new parties. At the same time, political parties and campaigns shape the opportunities, personnel, and outcomes of social movements. In many countries, electoral democracy itself is the outcome of social movement actions. This book, first published in 2003, examines the interaction of social movements and party politics since the 1950s, both in the United States and around the world. In studies of the US Civil Rights movement, the New Left, the Czechoslovak dissident movements, the Mexican struggle for democracy, and other episodes, this volume shows how party politics and social movements cannot be understood without appreciating their intimate relationship.
Shines a light on the dark corners of New Yorks legislature and points the way to much-needed reform. Failed State is both an original account of a state legislature in urgent need of reform and a call to action for those who would fix it. Drawing on his experiences both in and out of state government, former New York State senator Seymour P. Lachman reveals and explores Albanys hush-hush, top-down processes, illuminating the hidden, secretive corners where the state assembly and state senate conduct the peoples business and spend public money. Part memoir and part exposé, Failed State is a revision of and follow-up to Three Men in a Room, published in 2006. The focus of the original book was the injury to democratic governance that arises when three individualsgovernor, senate majority leader, and assembly speakertightly control one of the countrys largest and most powerful state governments. Expanding on events that have occurred in the decade since the original books publication, Failed State shows how this scenario has given way to widespread corruption, among them the convictions of two men in the roomthe senate and assembly leadersas well as a number of other state lawmakers. All chapters have been revised and expanded, new chapters have been added, and the final chapter charts a path to durable reform that would change New Yorks state government from its present-day status as a national disgrace to a model of transparent, more effective state politics and governance. Three Men in a Room was an important book when it came out over a decade ago, and sadly little has changed since then. In the context of high-level corruption convictions and the ongoing investigations by the US attorneys office, Failed State reminds us just how much needs to be done, and offers constructive recommendations about the kind of reform we so desperately need in Albany. Senator Liz Krueger, 28th New York State Senate District Weve all heard that Albanys a mess, that theres too much bad politics and sometimes corruption in the legislature. Its all true. How can that be? Are there any voices crying out to do it right? Seymour Lachmans Failed State takes you on a personal journey that explains how and why it can be that bad, as he discovers exactly what a lonely voice trying to do it right can doand what it cant. This is a read it and weep book by a principled man who was a legislator for close to a decade. But better than weeping, read itand do something. Peter C. Goldmark Jr., former New York State Budget Director and President of the Rockefeller Foundation In Failed State Seymour Lachman provides a birds-eye view into how New Yorks state legislature worksand doesnt work. Coupled with his extensive historical review, as a former legislator Lachman offers deep insights into whats wrong with Albany and helps make the case for fundamental changes. His sweeping analysis lays a foundation to make New York government more responsive to the public it purports to serve. For all New Yorkers looking to better understand their state government, Failed State is a must read. Blair Horner, Executive Director, New York Public Interest Research Group Seymour Lachman writes about Albany dysfunction as only an insider can. He knows firsthand what it is to be bullied and extorted by political bosses, to have to cast votes on massive, secretly negotiated budget deals on a few hours notice, to be the target of nakedly partisan gerrymandering, and to watch a parade of his colleagues go to prison for corruption. Failed State vividly documents a sordid era of New York history and provides a practical guide to real reform. Bill Hammond, The Empire Center The unifying theme here is that New York State government is broken and is not likely to mend itself. Lachman proposes a number of reforms that he believes will restore democracyamong them, the holding of a constitutional convention, which New Yorkers will vote on in November 2017. Timely and valuable, Failed State will help voters understand what the stakes are when making that decision. Peter J. Galie, coeditor of New Yorks Broken Constitution: The Governance Crisis and the Path to Renewed Greatness Praise for Three Men in a Room Startling: a political book that actually informs the public. Jimmy Breslin Three Men in a Room is a perceptive account of a state legislature in urgent need of reform, and of how to accomplish it. Senator Lachman had a front-row seat in Albany, as I once did. He also brings years of academic experience to this compelling and important book. Read it and take it seriouslyfor democracys sake. Hugh L. Carey, New York State Governor (19751983) Required reading for any New Yorker who wants to understand whats gone wrong in Albanyand why. This book provides an invaluable dissection of Albanys dysfunction from the perspective of an idealistic insider who emerged from the experience with his principles and credibility intact. Edmund J. McMahon Jr., Director, Empire Center for New York State Policy Both edifying and horrifying: Lachmans privileged perspective on New Yorks legislative practices is essential reading for would-be reformers. Artvoice
An investigation of policy preferences in the U.S. and how group opinion affects political representation. While it is often assumed that policymakers favor the interests of some citizens at the expense of others, it is not always evident when and how groups' interests differ or what it means when they do. Who Gets Represented? challenges the usual assumption that the preferences of any one group—women, African Americans, or the middle class—are incompatible with the preferences of other groups. The book analyzes differences across income, education, racial, and partisan groups and investigates whether and how differences in group opinion matter with regard to political representation. Part I examines opinions among social and racial groups. Relying on an innovative matching technique, contributors Marisa Abrajano and Keith Poole link respondents in different surveys to show that racial and ethnic groups do not, as previously thought, predictably embrace similar attitudes about social welfare. Katherine Cramer Walsh finds that, although preferences on health care policy and government intervention are often surprisingly similar across class lines, different income groups can maintain the same policy preferences for different reasons. Part II turns to how group interests translate into policy outcomes, with a focus on differences in representation between income groups. James Druckman and Lawrence Jacobs analyze Ronald Reagan's response to private polling data during his presidency and show how different electorally significant groups—Republicans, the wealthy, religious conservatives—wielded disproportionate influence on Reagan's policy positions. Christopher Wlezien and Stuart Soroka show that politicians' responsiveness to the preferences of constituents within different income groups can be surprisingly even-handed. Analyzing data from 1876 to the present, Wesley Hussey and John Zaller focus on the important role of political parties, vis-à-vis constituents' preferences, for legislators' behavior. Who Gets Represented? upends several long-held assumptions, among them the growing conventional wisdom that income plays in American politics and the assumption that certain groups will always—or will never—have common interests. Similarities among group opinions are as significant as differences for understanding political representation. Who Gets Represented? offers important and surprising answers to the question it raises.