Redivided Government and the Politics of the Budgetary Process in the Clinton Years
An Oral History Perspective
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6183285 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael Nelson (0000-0001-6917-4752, Rhodes College, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 43 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 300-323 |
| Publication date | 2016-09-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Congress & the Presidency (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0734-3469 • E-ISSN: 1944-1053 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/07343469.2016.1208689 |
| OpenAlex | W2512644900 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 8 |
Paul Quirk and Bruce Nesmith argue that divided government may or may not be functional, depending mostly on the type of policy that dominates the legislative agenda. In this article, I draw on the University of Virginia Miller Center's oral history of Bill Clinton's tenure as president to review budgetary politics in the 1990s, during which divided government prevailed for all but two years. I conclude that in addition to type of policy, political circumstances help to determine whether divided government produces stalemate or compromise. Conflict between the parties led to budgetary stalemate in 1995–1996, cooperation in the form of the Balanced Budget Act in 1996–1997, and stalemate again beginning in January 1998
Compromise · Divided government · Government (linguistics · Legislature · Miller · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Stalemate · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Political and Economic history of UK and US · Politics and Society in Latin America · Public Administration
| Citations per year | 0.2 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2021 - 2021 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |