skip to main content

The limits of electoral and legislative reform in addressing polarization. (response to article by Richard H. Pildes in this issue, p. 273) (Brennan Center Jorde Symposium on Constitutional Law)

Mccarty, Nolan M.

California Law Review, April, 2011, Vol.99(2), p.359-371 [Periódico revisado por pares]

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por
  • Título:
    The limits of electoral and legislative reform in addressing polarization. (response to article by Richard H. Pildes in this issue, p. 273) (Brennan Center Jorde Symposium on Constitutional Law)
  • Autor: Mccarty, Nolan M.
  • Assuntos: Polarization (Social sciences) -- Analysis ; Democracy -- Analysis ; Partisanship -- Analysis ; Voting Rights -- Analysis
  • É parte de: California Law Review, April, 2011, Vol.99(2), p.359-371
  • Descrição: Professor Richard Pildes provides a very thorough and persuasive overview of the key arguments about the causes of partisan polarization in the US. The author is especially sympathetic to his argument that deep macro-historical factors such as the partisan alignment of the South -- rather than idiosyncratic events, elections, and personalities -- bare the primary blame. Each of the reforms proposed by Professor Pildes may have many salutary effects, but political science research casts much doubt about their ability to reduce polarization or ameliorate its consequences. The polarization measure for each chamber is simply the average distance between Democratic and Republican legislators on this scale. While several concerns can be raised about the calculation and interpretation of these measures, their virtue is that they provide a picture of conflict among partisan elites for more than a century.
  • Idioma: English

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.