Welcome to Loot.co.za!
Sign in / Register |Wishlists & Gift Vouchers |Help | Advanced search
|
Your cart is empty |
|||
Showing 1 - 8 of 8 matches in All Departments
In this Third Edition of STATE AND LOCAL POLITICS: INSTITUTIONS AND REFORM, Donovan, Mooney, and Smith go beyond the purely descriptive treatment usually found in state and local texts. Offering an engaging comparative approach, the Third Edition shows students how politics and government differ between states and communities, and points out the causes and effects of those variations. The text also focuses on what social scientists know about the effects of rules and institutions on politics and policy. This comparative, institutional framework enables students to think more analytically about the impact of institutions on policy outcomes, asks them to evaluate the effectiveness of one institutional approach over another, and encourages them to consider more sophisticated solutions. Written by three young, high-profile specialists who have contributed significantly to the field in the last decade, STATE AND LOCAL POLITICS: INSTITUTIONS AND REFORM incorporates the most recent scholarship available into the course, giving students access to perspectives that no other textbook on the market currently provides.
If Barack Obama had not won in Iowa, most commentators believe
that he would not have been able to go on to capture the Democratic
nomination for president. "Why Iowa? "offers the definitive account
of those early weeks of the campaign season: from how the Iowa
caucuses work and what motivates the candidates' campaigns, to
participation and turnout, as well as the lingering effects that
the campaigning had on Iowa voters. Demonstrating how "what happens
in Iowa" truly reverberates throughout the country, five-time Iowa
precinct caucus chair David P. Redlawsk and his coauthors take us
on an inside tour of one of the most media-saturated and
speculated-about campaign events in American politics.
Democracy in the States offers a 21st century agenda for election reform in America based on lessons learned in the fifty states. Combining accessibility and rigor, leading scholars of U.S. politics and elections examine the impact of reforms intended to increase the integrity, fairness, and responsiveness of the electoral system. While some of these reforms focus on election administration, which has been the subject of much controversy since the 2000 presidential election, others seek more broadly to increase political participation and improve representation. For example, Paul Gronke (Reed College) and his colleagues study the relationship between early voting and turnout. Barry Burden (University of Wisconsin-Madison) examines the hurdles that third-party candidates must clear to get on the ballot in different states. Michael McDonald (George Mason University) analyzes the leading strategies for redistricting reform. And Todd Donovan (Western Washington University) focuses on how the spread of "safe" legislative seats affects both representation and participation. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously observed that "a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." Nowhere is this function more essential than in the sphere of election reform, as this important book shows.
Democratic elections are designed to create unequal outcomes: for some to win, others have to lose. This book examines the consequences of this inequality for the legitimacy of democratic political institutions and systems. Using survey data collected in democracies around the globe, the authors argue that losing generates ambivalent attitudes towards political authorities. Because the efficacy and ultimately the survival of democratic regimes can be seriously threatened if the losers do not consent to their loss, the central themes of this book focus on losing: how losers respond to their loss and how institutions shape losing. While there tends to be a gap in support for the political system between winners and losers, it is not ubiquitous. The book paints a picture of losers' consent that portrays losers as political actors whose experience and whose incentives to accept defeat are shaped both by who they are as individuals as well as the political environment in which loss is given meaning. Given that the winner-loser gap in legitimacy is a persistent feature of democratic politics, the findings presented in this book contain crucial implications for our understanding of the functioning and stability of democracies.
Referenda on important public policy questions have come to play a
central role in policy making in many states. Referenda, or ballot
propositions, have resulted in limits on taxation and limits on the
number of terms of elected officials, and have dealt with bilingual
education, campaign finances, and affirmative action, in states all
over the country.
If Barack Obama had not won in Iowa, most commentators believe
that he would not have been able to go on to capture the Democratic
nomination for president. "Why Iowa? "offers the definitive account
of those early weeks of the campaign season: from how the Iowa
caucuses work and what motivates the candidates' campaigns, to
participation and turnout, as well as the lingering effects that
the campaigning had on Iowa voters. Demonstrating how "what happens
in Iowa" truly reverberates throughout the country, five-time Iowa
precinct caucus chair David P. Redlawsk and his coauthors take us
on an inside tour of one of the most media-saturated and
speculated-about campaign events in American politics.
In this Fourth Edition of STATE AND LOCAL POLITICS: INSTITUTIONS AND REFORM, Donovan, Smith, Mooney, and new co-author Tracy Osborn go beyond the purely descriptive treatment usually found in state and local texts. Offering an engaging comparative approach, the Fourth Edition shows you how politics and government differ between states and communities, and points out the causes and effects of those variations. The text also focuses on what social scientists know about the effects of rules and institutions on politics and policy. This comparative, institutional framework enables you to think more analytically about the impact of institutions on policy outcomes, asks you to evaluate the effectiveness of one institutional approach over another, and encourages you to consider more sophisticated solutions.
|
You may like...
|