Remaking Government Institutions in the 1970s: Participatory Democracy and the Triumph of Administrative Politics

Journal of Policy History

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 51-74

  Milkis, Sidney M ^a  

^a BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038493477     PISSN: 08980306     EISSN: 15284190     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0898030600005522     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Hugh Heclo, “The Sixties' False Dawn: Awakenings, Movements, and Postmodern Policy-Making,” Journal of Policy History 8:1 (1996): 56.
2. Jeffrey Berry, The Interest Group Society (Boston, 1984), 28.
3. Public Papers of the President of the United States: Lyndon Baines Johnson, 1963–1964, vol. 1, 704. Richard Goodwin, who drafted the Great Society speech, acknowledges that it was partly inspired by the Port Huron Statement, which was issued in 1962 by the newly formed Students for a Democratic Society. One aspect of that address, in particular, impressed the presidential aide as expressing a yearning that went well beyond the Utopian vision of radical fringe groups, and was shared by many Americans: “Some would have us believe that Americans feel contentment amidst prosperity–but might it not better be called a glaze above deeply felt anxieties about their role in the new world?
4. And if these anxieties produce a developed indifference to human affairs, do they not as well produce a yearning to believe there is an alternative to the present, that something can be done to change circumstances in the schools, the workplaces, the bureaucracies, the government? It is to this latter yearning, at once the spark and agent of change, that we direct our present appeal.” To be sure, it is not easy to imagine Lyndon Johnson embracing New Left doctrine. But, Goodwin argues, persuasively, that such ideas corresponded “to Lyndon Johnson's own impulses, could help define and fuel the larger purposes he wished to pursue.” Students for a Democratic Society, “Port Huron Statement,” printed in The New Left: A Documentary History, ed. Missimo Teodori (Indianapolis, 1969), 165.
5. See also Richard Goodwin, Remembering America (Boston, 1988), 274, 276.
6. Daniel P. Moynihan, Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding: Community Action in the War on Poverty (New York, 1970).
7. Samuel Beer, “In Search of a New Public Philosophy,” in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, D.C., 1979), 27–28.
8. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (Garden City, N.Y., 1969), 263.
9. Michael W. McCann, “Public Interest Liberalism and the Modern Regulatory State,” Polity 21 (Winter 1988): 392.
10. Stephen E. Ambrose, Nixon, Volume 3: Ruin and Recovery, 1973–1990 (New York, 1991).
11. On the tension between the modern executive and the party system, see Sidney M. Milkis, The President and the Parties: The Transformation of the American Party System Since the New Deal (New York, 1993).
12. U.S. v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974).
13. Fred I. Greenstein, “Nine Presidents in Search of a Modern Presidency,” in Greenstein, ed., Leadership in the Modern Presidency (Cambridge, Mass., 1988), 334.
14. On the House Study Group, see Mark F. Ferber, “The Formation of the Democratic Study Group,” in Congressional Behavior, ed. Nelson W. Polsby (New York, 1971).
15. R. Shep Melnick, Between the Lines: Interpreting Welfare Rights (Washington, D.C., 1994), 196–200.
16. Benjamin Ginsberg and Martin Shefter, Politics by Other Means (New York, 1990), 16.
17. R. Shep Melnick, “The Politics of Partnership,” Public Administration Review 45 (November 1985): 653–660.
18. Walter A. Rosenbaum, “Public Involvement as Reform and Ritual: The Political Development of Federal Participation Programs,” in Citizen Participation in America: Essays on the State of the Art, ed. Stuart Langton (Lexington, Mass., 1978).
19. For a more detailed discussion of the meaning and significance of social regulation, see Richard A. Harris and Sidney M. Milkis, The Politics of Regulatory Change: A Tale of Two Agencies, 2d ed. (New York, 1996), especially chapters 1 and 3.
20. Falk cited in Berry, The Interest Group Society, 36.
21. Ralph Nader, “The Case for Federal Chartering,” in The Consumer and Corporate Accountability (New York, 1973), 365.
22. McCann, “Public Interest Liberalism and the Modern Regulatory State,” 389, 394.
23. Interview with Richard A. Harris and Sidney M. Milkis, July 11, 1986.
24. Rosenbaum, “Public Involvement as Reform and Ritual,” 81.
25. “Public Involvement as Reform and Ritual,” 83.
26. Joan B. Aron, “Citizen Participation at Government Expense,” Public Administration Review 39 (September-October 1979): 477–485.
27. Max D. Peglin and Edgar Shore, “Regulatory Agency Responses to the Development of Public Participation,” Public Administration Review 37 (March-April 1977): 142.
28. Barry Boyer, “Funding Public Participation in Agency Proceedings: The Federal Trade Commission Experience,” Georgetown Law Journal 70:1 (1980): 71.
29. On this development, see Melnick, Between the Lines.
30. Martin Shapiro, “APA: Past, Present, and Future,” Virginia Law Review 72 (1986): 461–462.
31. Richard B. Stewart, “The Reformation of American Administrative Law,” Harvard Law Review 88:8 (June 1975): 1712.
32. James Q. Wilson, “The Politics of Regulation,” in James Q. Wilson, ed., The Politics of Regulation (New York, 1980), 370–371.
33. Michael Pertschuck, Revolt Against Regulation: The Rise and Pause of the Consumer Movement (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1982), 130.
34. Jeremy Rabkin, “The Judiciary in the Administrative State,” The Public Interest 71 (Spring 1983): 63.
35. Hugh Heclo, “Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment,” in King, ed., The New American Political System, 124.
36. Ralph Nader, “A Citizen's Guide to the American Economy,” in Nader, ed., The Consumer and Corporate Accountability, 4.
37. Barry D. Karl, The Uneasy State: The United States from 1915 to 1945 (Chicago, 1983), 238.
38. James Ceaser, Presidential Selection: Theory and Development (Princeton, 1979), 283.
39. R. Shep Melnick, “The Politics of Partnership: Institutional Coalitions and Statutory Rights,” Occasional Paper No. 84–3, Center for American Political Studies, Harvard University, 8.
40. For a review of these institutional developments and how they were modified during the Reagan years, see Harris and Milkis, The Politics of Regulatory Change, chapter 4.
41. Jimmy Carter, Keeping Faith: Memoirs of a President (New York, 1982), 80.
42. Erwin Hargrove, Jimnvy Carter as President: Leadership and the Politics of the Public Good (Baton Rouge, La., 1988), 192.
43. “The Scramble Starts,” Editorial, Los Angeles Times, July 17, 1979, part II, 4
44. Robert Shogan, “Carter Returns to Moralistic Themes,” Editorial, Los Angeles Times, I, 1, 15.
45. Transcript of President Carter's Address to the Country on Energy Problems,” New York Times, July 16, 1979.
46. W. Carey McWilliams, “Conclusion: The Meaning of the Election,” in Gerald Pomper et al., The Election of 1996: Reports and Interpretations (Chatham, N.J., 1997), 258–259.