This is probably the most important reading in relation to Congress as it

This is probably the most important reading in

This preview shows page 66 - 68 out of 77 pages.

This is probably the most important reading in relation to Congress, as it pertains to how Congress is affected by the permanent campaign. It initially talks about the “two-year electoral rhythm” of House members, as elections are constantly kept on the front burner as a result of earlier-than-ever primaries. This drive for elections leads to “candidate-centered” or “entrepreneurial” politics, as the focus becomes more individualized. This candidate-centered type of politics leads to a host of behavioral changes in Congress. Vote choice is increasingly important, as opposing researchers look to dig up former votes to use against a member in campaigns. Filibusters are increasingly common to prove ones allegiance to a certain side against an issue. And the “death of comity and courtesy” is also discussed as Congress is described as hard-edged as a result of increased interest group pressure and media coverage.New standards of governing have been instituted to account for the permanent campaign. Increased travelhas led to the nickname of the “Tuesday-Thursday club” since congressmen need to campaign on weekends. Votinghabits have swung dramatically towards party affiliation, and accordingly there is an extremity of proposals made to show dedication to party ideals. Choosing leadersis done in a fashion so that the leaders are made sure to be in a position to help the party out. The article’s main point can be summed up in the following passage: “Too often, the motives of today’s [congressmen] revolve around destroying their enemies rather than developing a legislative product broadly acceptable to the electorate.” The blame is not pinned on Congress however, but on the nature of the permanent campaign.******************************************************************************4/16******************************************************************************Lindblom, Charles. “The Science of Muddling Through.” -Bureaucratic Politics -Administrators are mistakenly taught to solve problems using what Lindblom decribes as the Root Method.” -In this method, the best means is determined in order to reach a specific goal -common theories (i.e. political, economic) are utilized based on what has worked in the past -But, in reality, the Root Method is rarely used because it presupposes too much intellectual capacity to predict the best means to and end and resources (like time and money) are often unavailable. -a better form of problem solving is the Branch Method (aka “successive limited comparisons”)
Image of page 66
-(proving that the Branch Method kicks ass is basically what this article is about) -the Root Method doesn’t work because it is all about the end-goal. Oftentimes, the goal is difficult to define -example from Lindblom: in evicting tenants from an apartment building, is the goal to remove them quickly, to make sure they have new housing, or to make sure the surrounding neighborhood is not adversely affected too much? Root Method says you have to pick one, but Branch Method says that all three can be goals at the same time. -The Root Method is inadequate because goals can be diverse and it is often impossible to rank-order them.
Image of page 67
Image of page 68

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 77 pages?

  • Spring '11
  • various
  • Government, Separation of Powers

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes