Legacies of the 1960s: The American “Rights Revolution” in an Era of Divided Governance

Journal of Policy History

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 267-288

  Graham, Hugh Davis ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84883902609     PISSN: 08980306     EISSN: 15284190     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0898030600005686     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. See Byron E. Shafer and William J. M. Claggett, The Two Majorities: The Issue Context of Modem American Politics (Baltimore, 1995)
2. Byron E. Shafer, ed. Postwar Politics in the G-7: Orders and Eras in Comparative Perspective (Madison, Wis. 1996).
3. Alan J. Ware, The Breakdown of Democratic Party Organization, 1940-1980 (Oxford, 1985)
4. Ronald Radosh, Divided They Fall: The Demise of the Democratic Party, 1964-1996 (New York, 1996)
5. Nicole C. Ray, The Rise and Fall of the Liberal Republicans (New York, 1989)
6. David R. Mayhew, Placing Parties in American Politics (Princeton, 1986).
7. Cass R. Sunstein, After the Rights Revolution (Cambridge, Mass. 1990)
8. Mary Ann Glendon, RightsTalk (New York, 1991)
9. Hugh Davis Graham, “Since 1964: The Paradox of American Civil Rights Regulation,” in Taking Stock: American Government in the Twentieth Century, ed. Morton Keller and R. Shep Melnick (New York, forthcoming).
10. Hugh Davis Graham, “Richard Nixon and Civil Rights: Explaining an Enigma,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 26 (Winter 1996): 93-106
11. Hugh Davis Graham, “Civil Rights Policy in the Carter Presidency,” in TheCarter Presidency: Policy Choices in the Post-New Deal Em, ed. Gary M. Fink and Hugh Davis Graham (Lawrence, Kan. 1998), 202-23
12. Hugh Davis Graham, “The Politics of Clientele Capture: Civil Rights Policy in the Reagan Administration,” in Redeeming Equality, ed. Neal Devins and Davison M. Douglas (New York, 1998), 103-19.
13. Shafer and Claggett, The Two Majorities
14. Shafer, Postwar Politics, 12–46.
15. Leon Epstein, Political Parties in the American Mold (Madison, Wis. 1986).
16. Gary C. Jacobson, The Electoral Origin ofDvided Government (Boulder, Colo. 1990)
17. Gary W. Cox and Samuel Kemell, eds. The Politics of Divided Government (Boulder, Colo. 1991)
18. James A. Thurber, ed. Rivals for Power. Presidential-Congressional Relations (Washington, D.C. 1996).
19. Suzanne Garment, Scandal: The Crisis of Mistrust in American Politics (New York, 1991)
20. Peter W. Morgan and Glenn H. Reynolds, The Appearance of Impropriety: How the Ethics Wars Have Undermined American Government, Business, and Society (New York, 1997).
21. Following World War 11, the academic establishment of American political science fostered a liberal-reformist credo that emphasized unified partisan government and presidential leadership in the tradition of Roosevelt and the New Deal. See James L. Sundquist, Dynamics of the Party System: Alignmentand Realignment of Political Parties in the United States (Washington, D.C. 1973), especially chaps. 10-12.
22. For a recent explication of this view, which emphasizes policy gridlock or stalemate under divided partisan government, see Sundquist, “Needed: A Political Theory for the New Era of Coalition Government in the United States,” Political Science Quartedy 103 (Winter 1988-1989): 613–35.
23. David R. Mayhew, in Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking, and Investigations, 1946-1990 (New Haven, 1991), challenges the stalemate thesis by identifying 267 important enactments showing considerably less clustering under unified partisan governments than the stalemate thesis would predict.
24. Congressional scholar Charles O. Jones, in The Presidency in a Separated System (Washington, D.C. 1994), shares Mayhew's concern that system production should be the test of policymaking, not whether the president got what he wanted.
25. See also David W. Brady and Craig Voldem, Revolving Gridlock (Boulder, Colo. 1998).
26. Marc K. Landry and Martin A. Levin, eds. The New Politics of Public Policy (Baltimore, 1995).
27. In 1961 the Supreme Court in Monroe v. Pape broadened the interpretation of section 1983 of Title 42 of the U.S. Code, enacted in 1871 to make federal remedies available to anyone deprived of a constitutional or statutory right by a person acting “under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State.” The Court in Monroe enabled plaintiffs to seek damages in a federal court as a first resort, rather than as a backstop available only after state-level remedies had been exhausted. See Martha Derthick, “Crossing the Thresholds: Federalism in the 1960s,” Journal of Policy History 8:1 (1996): 64-80.
28. Donald L. Horowitz, The Courts and Social Policy (Washington, D.C. 1977)
29. Sunstein, After the Rights Revolution.
30. Abram Chayes, “The Role of the Judge in Public Law Litigation,” 89 Harvard Law Review 1281 (1976).
31. Criticism of judicial activism, developed by liberals in the Progressive and New Deal eras to protest the conservative activism of the Lochner court, was voiced by conservatives in the wake of the Warren Court. See Alexander M. Bickel, The Least Dangerous Branch (New Haven, 1962)
32. Horowitz, The Courts and Social Policy
33. J. Harvie Wilkinson III, From Brown to Bakke (New York, 1979).
34. James F. Blumstein, “Constitutional Perspectives on Government Decisions Affecting Human Life and Health,” 40 Law and Contemporary Problems 231 (1976)
35. Jeremy A. Rabkin and Neal E. Devins, “Averting Government by Consent Decree: Constitutional Limitations in the Enforcement of Settlements with the Federal Government,” 40 Stanford Law Review 203 (1987).
36. Stephen C. Halpem, On the Limits of the Law: The Ironic Legacy of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Baltimore, 1995).
37. Hugh Davis Graham, “The Civil Rights Act and the American Regulatory State,” in Controversies in Civil Rights, ed. Bernard Grofman (Charlottesville, Va. forthcoming).
38. U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Categorical Grants: Their Role and Design (Washington, D.C. 1978).
39. Women, excluded from the original, race-oriented set-aside program in 1977, much as they had been excluded from Tide VI in 1964, again pursued a parallel, catch-up strategy. In 1979 President Carter issued Executive Order 12138 to include women-owned businesses in federal assistance programs. The Women's Business Ownership Act of 1988 authorized the federal promotion of women business enterprises (WBEs), which received x0024;1.75 billion in federal contracts that year. See George R. LaNoue and John C. Sullivan, “Presumptions for Preferences: The Small Business Administration's Decisions on Groups Entided to Affirmative Action,” Journal of Policy History 6: 4 (1994): 439-67.
40. In 1989, when Republican-appointed conservatives achieved a narrow majority on the Supreme Court, the Richmond MBE set-aside was held unconstitutional in Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. 488 U.S. 469 (1989).
41. In Adarand Constructors Inc. v. Pena, 115 S. Ct. 2097 (1995), the Supreme Court overturned Fullilove, applying strict judicial scrutiny to racial classifications by government, as in Croson (and Broun).
42. James Q. Wilson, ed. The Politics of Regulation (New York, 1980), 357-94
43. Wilson, Bureaucracy (New York, 1989), 72-89
44. Michael Reagan, Regulation: The Politics of Policy (Boston, 1987).
45. In a few celebrated instances (school desegregation guidelines for Mayor Daley's Chicago, school dress codes and hair-length codes, school-busing requirements for racial balance), OCR regulations were repudiated even by Democratic-controlled Congresses. In others (banning boys' choirs and father-daughter school dinners), public ridicule forced bureaucratic retreat. See, for example, Joseph A. Califano, Governing America (New York, 1981), 219-26.
46. City of Mobile, Alabama v. Bolden, 446 U.S. 55 (1980)
47. Grove City College v. Bell, 465 U.S. 555 (1984)
48. Wards Cove Packing Co. Inc. v. Antonio, 490 U.S. 642 (1989).
49. David Reimers, Still the Open Door (New York, 1992)
50. National Research Council, The NewAmericans: Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration (Washington, D.C. 1997).
51. Mark Krikorian, “Affirmative Action and Immigration,” in Debating Affirmative Action, ed. Nicholas Mills (New York, 1994), 300-304.
52. Plyerv. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982).
53. Peter Schuck, “The Politics of Rapid Legal Change: Immigration Policy in the 1980s,” Studies in American Political Development 6 (1992): 37-92.
54. Georges Borjas, “The Economics of Immigration,” Journal of Economic Literature 32 (1994): 1667-1717
55. National Research Council, The New Americans.
56. Kevin F. McCarthy and Georges Vemez, Immigration in a Changing Economy: California's Experience (Santa Monica, Calif. 1997)
57. George J. Borjas and Lynette Hilton, “Immigration and the Welfare State: Immigration Participation in Means-Tested Entidement Programs,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 3 (1995): 575-604.
58. Wilson Carey McWilliams, “Two-Tier Politics and the Problem of Public Policy,” in The New Politics of Public Policy, 268–76.
59. Sheldon Danzinger and Peter Gottschalk, eds. Uneven Tides: Rising Inequality in America (New York, 1993), 6-9.
60. Andrew Hacker, Money: Who Has How Much and Why? (New York, 1997), 46-56
61. Michael Walzer, “Hard Questions: The Big Shrug,” The New 1 Republic, 2 February 1998, 9–10.
62. David A. Hollinger, Postethnic America: Beyond Multiculturalism (New York, 1995), 8.
63. Todd Gidin, The Twilight of Common Dreams: Why America Is Wracked by Culture Wars (New York, 1995)
64. Lawrence H. Fuchs, The American Kaleidoscope: Race, Ethnicity, and the Civic Culture (Hanover, Conn. 1990)
65. Michael Lind, The Next American hJation (New York, 1995)
66. Katha Pollitt, Reasonable Creatures: Essays on Women and Feminism (New York, 1994); Hollinger, Postethnic America.
67. Gidin, The Twilight of Common Dreams, 148–49, 230.
68. Yael Tamir, Liberal Nationalism (Princeton, 1993)
69. David Miller, On Nationality (Oxford, 1995)
70. Will Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Oxford, 1995)
71. Russell Hardin, One for All: The Logic of Group Conflict (Princeton, 1995)
72. Ernest Haas, Nationalism, Liberalism, and Progress (Ithaca, N.Y. 1997)
73. Martin E. Marty, The One and the Many: America's Struggle for the Common Good (Cambridge, Mass. 1997)
74. David A. Hollinger, “National Solidarity at the End of the Twentieth Century: Reflections on the United States and Liberal Nationalism,” Journal of American History 84 (September 1997): 559-69.
75. Miller, On Nationality, 187.
76. Paul M. Sniderman and Thomas Piazza, The Scar of Race (Cambridge, Mass. 1993)
77. Paul M. Sniderman and Edward G. Carmines, Reaching Beyond Race (Cambridge, Mass. 1997).
78. Carll Everett Ladd, “1996 Vote: The ‘No Majority’ Realignment Continues,” Political Science Quarterly 112 (1997): 1-28.