Losing Control: The Intraparty Consequences of Divided Government
Divided government scholarship focuses either on evaluating divided government's correlation to legislative gridlock or on its tendency toward interparty squabbling. I argue that one overlooked aspect of divided government is its impact on intraparty dynamics: Divided government offers the cont...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Presidential studies quarterly 2001-12, Vol.31 (4), p.679-698 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 698 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 679 |
| container_title | Presidential studies quarterly |
| container_volume | 31 |
| creator | ROSE, MELODY |
| description | Divided government scholarship focuses either on evaluating divided government's correlation to legislative gridlock or on its tendency toward interparty squabbling. I argue that one overlooked aspect of divided government is its impact on intraparty dynamics: Divided government offers the controlling congressional party incentives to raise controversial issues to damage the coherence of the president's party. Revealing the tensions within the president's party serves to embarrass the president, increase the electoral chances of the majority party in Congress, and ultimately shift public policy. This phenomenon can be understood through Riker's theory of heresthetic. The contemporary debates between President Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress over abortion and gay rights provide ample evidence that this theory of divided government is compelling and warrants further consideration. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.0000-0000.2001.00193.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60625908</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A80805094</galeid><jstor_id>27552346</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A80805094</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4443-8b3e73ac95790910a4e0e933e96e923be84288b691ade17f7ff80d4595f01ba33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1vEzEQhlcIJELhJyCtOHBiw_jbRlyiFNJKUQtqoEfL2cyGXTbr1N6U5N_jZVEPXMocxmPP81rzkWU5gSlJ9r6ZQrJicFMKQNKVGDY9PskmRHFSCAXiaTYBJqHghujn2YsYm0Rzw9gkmy19rLttPvddH3z7IV_9wPwyxW7vQn8a3iPeHbArMea-ys_r-3qDm3zh7zF0O-z6l9mzyrURX_09z7Jvnz-t5hfF8npxOZ8ti5Jzzgq9ZqiYK41QBgwBxxEwlYBGoqFsjZpTrdfSELdBoipVVRo2XBhRAVk7xs6yt-O_--BTQbG3uzqW2LauQ3-IVoKkwoB-FBRGS6aBPAoyzbigAhL45h-w8YfQpW4tJUIakJom6N0IbV2Ltu7KNFE89qVvW9yiTbOYX9uZBg0CDE-4HvEy-BgDVnYf6p0LJ0vADpu1jR2WOrphs_bPZu0xST-O0l91i6f_1tkvN19TkOSvR3kTex8e5FQJQRmXKV-M-TqmBh7yLvy0UjEl7O3VwtLbi5tz_f3KrthvtYu-uQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>215690682</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Losing Control: The Intraparty Consequences of Divided Government</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>ROSE, MELODY</creator><creatorcontrib>ROSE, MELODY</creatorcontrib><description>Divided government scholarship focuses either on evaluating divided government's correlation to legislative gridlock or on its tendency toward interparty squabbling. I argue that one overlooked aspect of divided government is its impact on intraparty dynamics: Divided government offers the controlling congressional party incentives to raise controversial issues to damage the coherence of the president's party. Revealing the tensions within the president's party serves to embarrass the president, increase the electoral chances of the majority party in Congress, and ultimately shift public policy. This phenomenon can be understood through Riker's theory of heresthetic. The contemporary debates between President Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress over abortion and gay rights provide ample evidence that this theory of divided government is compelling and warrants further consideration.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0360-4918</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-5705</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.0000-0000.2001.00193.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PSQUDS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Abortion ; Clinton, William Jefferson (Bill) ; Congressional voting ; Constitution ; Democratic party (United States) ; Evaluation ; Executive power ; Gay rights ; Gays ; Government policy ; Government productivity ; Governmental process ; Legal status, laws, etc ; Legislative Bodies ; Legislative power ; Marriage law ; Partisanship ; Party politics ; Policy making ; Political aspects ; Political debate ; Political Parties ; Political Power ; Political science ; Political Science Theories ; Presidency ; President ; Presidents ; Public policy ; Relations with Congress ; Representative government ; Representative government and representation ; Republican party (United States) ; Same sex marriage ; Social policy ; Theory ; U.S.A ; United States ; United States Senate ; Voting</subject><ispartof>Presidential studies quarterly, 2001-12, Vol.31 (4), p.679-698</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2001 Center for the Study of the Presidency</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Center for the Study of the Presidency Dec 2001</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4443-8b3e73ac95790910a4e0e933e96e923be84288b691ade17f7ff80d4595f01ba33</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/27552346$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/27552346$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,801,1414,12828,27848,27907,27908,45557,45558,58000,58233</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>ROSE, MELODY</creatorcontrib><title>Losing Control: The Intraparty Consequences of Divided Government</title><title>Presidential studies quarterly</title><addtitle>Presidential Studies Quarterly</addtitle><description>Divided government scholarship focuses either on evaluating divided government's correlation to legislative gridlock or on its tendency toward interparty squabbling. I argue that one overlooked aspect of divided government is its impact on intraparty dynamics: Divided government offers the controlling congressional party incentives to raise controversial issues to damage the coherence of the president's party. Revealing the tensions within the president's party serves to embarrass the president, increase the electoral chances of the majority party in Congress, and ultimately shift public policy. This phenomenon can be understood through Riker's theory of heresthetic. The contemporary debates between President Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress over abortion and gay rights provide ample evidence that this theory of divided government is compelling and warrants further consideration.</description><subject>Abortion</subject><subject>Clinton, William Jefferson (Bill)</subject><subject>Congressional voting</subject><subject>Constitution</subject><subject>Democratic party (United States)</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Executive power</subject><subject>Gay rights</subject><subject>Gays</subject><subject>Government policy</subject><subject>Government productivity</subject><subject>Governmental process</subject><subject>Legal status, laws, etc</subject><subject>Legislative Bodies</subject><subject>Legislative power</subject><subject>Marriage law</subject><subject>Partisanship</subject><subject>Party politics</subject><subject>Policy making</subject><subject>Political aspects</subject><subject>Political debate</subject><subject>Political Parties</subject><subject>Political Power</subject><subject>Political science</subject><subject>Political Science Theories</subject><subject>Presidency</subject><subject>President</subject><subject>Presidents</subject><subject>Public policy</subject><subject>Relations with Congress</subject><subject>Representative government</subject><subject>Representative government and representation</subject><subject>Republican party (United States)</subject><subject>Same sex marriage</subject><subject>Social policy</subject><subject>Theory</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>United States Senate</subject><subject>Voting</subject><issn>0360-4918</issn><issn>1741-5705</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>PQHSC</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1vEzEQhlcIJELhJyCtOHBiw_jbRlyiFNJKUQtqoEfL2cyGXTbr1N6U5N_jZVEPXMocxmPP81rzkWU5gSlJ9r6ZQrJicFMKQNKVGDY9PskmRHFSCAXiaTYBJqHghujn2YsYm0Rzw9gkmy19rLttPvddH3z7IV_9wPwyxW7vQn8a3iPeHbArMea-ys_r-3qDm3zh7zF0O-z6l9mzyrURX_09z7Jvnz-t5hfF8npxOZ8ti5Jzzgq9ZqiYK41QBgwBxxEwlYBGoqFsjZpTrdfSELdBoipVVRo2XBhRAVk7xs6yt-O_--BTQbG3uzqW2LauQ3-IVoKkwoB-FBRGS6aBPAoyzbigAhL45h-w8YfQpW4tJUIakJom6N0IbV2Ltu7KNFE89qVvW9yiTbOYX9uZBg0CDE-4HvEy-BgDVnYf6p0LJ0vADpu1jR2WOrphs_bPZu0xST-O0l91i6f_1tkvN19TkOSvR3kTex8e5FQJQRmXKV-M-TqmBh7yLvy0UjEl7O3VwtLbi5tz_f3KrthvtYu-uQ</recordid><startdate>200112</startdate><enddate>200112</enddate><creator>ROSE, MELODY</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Sage Publications, Inc</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Center for the Study of the Presidency</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>EHMNL</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQHSC</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200112</creationdate><title>Losing Control: The Intraparty Consequences of Divided Government</title><author>ROSE, MELODY</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4443-8b3e73ac95790910a4e0e933e96e923be84288b691ade17f7ff80d4595f01ba33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Abortion</topic><topic>Clinton, William Jefferson (Bill)</topic><topic>Congressional voting</topic><topic>Constitution</topic><topic>Democratic party (United States)</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Executive power</topic><topic>Gay rights</topic><topic>Gays</topic><topic>Government policy</topic><topic>Government productivity</topic><topic>Governmental process</topic><topic>Legal status, laws, etc</topic><topic>Legislative Bodies</topic><topic>Legislative power</topic><topic>Marriage law</topic><topic>Partisanship</topic><topic>Party politics</topic><topic>Policy making</topic><topic>Political aspects</topic><topic>Political debate</topic><topic>Political Parties</topic><topic>Political Power</topic><topic>Political science</topic><topic>Political Science Theories</topic><topic>Presidency</topic><topic>President</topic><topic>Presidents</topic><topic>Public policy</topic><topic>Relations with Congress</topic><topic>Representative government</topic><topic>Representative government and representation</topic><topic>Republican party (United States)</topic><topic>Same sex marriage</topic><topic>Social policy</topic><topic>Theory</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>United States Senate</topic><topic>Voting</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>ROSE, MELODY</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>UK & Ireland Database</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>History Study Center</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Presidential studies quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>ROSE, MELODY</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Losing Control: The Intraparty Consequences of Divided Government</atitle><jtitle>Presidential studies quarterly</jtitle><addtitle>Presidential Studies Quarterly</addtitle><date>2001-12</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>679</spage><epage>698</epage><pages>679-698</pages><issn>0360-4918</issn><eissn>1741-5705</eissn><coden>PSQUDS</coden><abstract>Divided government scholarship focuses either on evaluating divided government's correlation to legislative gridlock or on its tendency toward interparty squabbling. I argue that one overlooked aspect of divided government is its impact on intraparty dynamics: Divided government offers the controlling congressional party incentives to raise controversial issues to damage the coherence of the president's party. Revealing the tensions within the president's party serves to embarrass the president, increase the electoral chances of the majority party in Congress, and ultimately shift public policy. This phenomenon can be understood through Riker's theory of heresthetic. The contemporary debates between President Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress over abortion and gay rights provide ample evidence that this theory of divided government is compelling and warrants further consideration.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.0000-0000.2001.00193.x</doi><tpages>20</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0360-4918 |
| ispartof | Presidential studies quarterly, 2001-12, Vol.31 (4), p.679-698 |
| issn | 0360-4918 1741-5705 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60625908 |
| source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Jstor Complete Legacy |
| subjects | Abortion Clinton, William Jefferson (Bill) Congressional voting Constitution Democratic party (United States) Evaluation Executive power Gay rights Gays Government policy Government productivity Governmental process Legal status, laws, etc Legislative Bodies Legislative power Marriage law Partisanship Party politics Policy making Political aspects Political debate Political Parties Political Power Political science Political Science Theories Presidency President Presidents Public policy Relations with Congress Representative government Representative government and representation Republican party (United States) Same sex marriage Social policy Theory U.S.A United States United States Senate Voting |
| title | Losing Control: The Intraparty Consequences of Divided Government |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T15%3A36%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Losing%20Control:%20The%20Intraparty%20Consequences%20of%20Divided%20Government&rft.jtitle=Presidential%20studies%20quarterly&rft.au=ROSE,%20MELODY&rft.date=2001-12&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=679&rft.epage=698&rft.pages=679-698&rft.issn=0360-4918&rft.eissn=1741-5705&rft.coden=PSQUDS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.0000-0000.2001.00193.x&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA80805094%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=215690682&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A80805094&rft_jstor_id=27552346&rfr_iscdi=true |