|
|
Title: Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power (Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions)
Purchase
Item
Manufacturer: Cambridge University Press
List Price: $31.99
Our Price: $26.65
|
|
| Customer Reviews: |
| Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power (Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions) by Cambridge University Press No Kidding! | | The book review does not lie when it calls this book a major contribution. To political scientists interested in formal theory, the presidency, executive-legislative relations, or divided government, this book is one of the best to come along in years. Especially in presidential studies, this book is probably the best to come along since Light's "President's Agenda," and perhaps the best since 1960 and Neustadt's "Presidential Power." For formal theory people, this book is an exemplar of how good, rigorous theory and careful, skilled empirical analysis can work together to produce both a well-reasoned and well-supported picture of the veto and its affect on policy. For those who abhor formal theory, the rich case studies are informative reading, too. Overall, this book is what political science should be about. | | Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power (Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions) by Cambridge University Press Product Description | | With one party controlling the presidency and the opposing party controlling Congress, the veto has inevitably become a critical tool of presidential power. Combining sophisticated game theory with unprecedented data, this book analyzes how divided party presidents use threats and vetoes to wrest policy concessions from a hostile Congress. Case studies of the most important vetoes in recent history add texture to the analysis, detailing how President Clinton altered the course of Newt Gingrich's Republican Revolution. Offering the first book-length analysis to bring rational choice theory to bear on the presidency, Veto Bargaining is a major contribution to our understanding of American politics in an age of divided party government. |
| |
