1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Political Science
  4. Volume 26, 2023
  5. Article

Annual Review of Political Science

Volume 26, 2023

Agenda Democracy

Abstract

The study of agenda setting has become curiously disconnected from democratic theory and democratization. Following Schattschneider, Dahl, and recent developments in political theory, I call for its reintegration in theoretical and empirical realms. The concept of agenda democracy allows for better understanding of contests over institutions, significant historical-institutional transformations, the study of inequality and its mechanisms of generation and maintenance, and the building and undermining of democracy. Agenda democracy requires a broad understanding of agendas (beyond a mere menu of final policy choices), recognizes that many democratic regimes have institutions that systematically render agendas nondemocratic, and compels us to look at the interstices of institutions and society (party transformation, petition and grievance mechanisms, advocacy campaigns, initiatives to expand what I call the shortlist of the possible) for moments of significant change. Agenda democracy compels the examination of democratizing agenda restrictions, the study of conservative organizations in politics, and the consideration of decomposing the term “movement.”

Keyword(s): advocacy, agenda setting, agendas, democracy, petitions, social movements
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533
2023-06-15
2024-04-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/polisci/26/1/annurev-polisci-051921-102533.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Acemoglu D, Robinson J 2006. Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  2. Ahmed S. 2021. Complaint! Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
  3. Allen D. 2004. Talking to Strangers: Anxieties of Citizenship since Brown v. Board of Education Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  4. Allen D. 2016. Education and Equality Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  5. Amenta E, Caren N, Chiarello E, Su Y. 2010. The political consequences of social movements. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 36:287–307
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Ansell CK. 2001. Schism and Solidarity in Social Movements: The Politics of Labor in the French Third Republic New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  7. Arrington C. 2019. Hiding in plain sight: pseudonymity and participation in legal mobilization. Comp. Political Stud. 52:2310–41
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bachrach P, Baratz MS. 1962. The two faces of power. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 56:4947–52
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bailey E. 1979. Popular Influence upon Public Policy: Petitioning in Eighteenth-Century Virginia Greenwood, CT: Greenwood Press
  10. Banaszak LA. 1996. Why Movements Succeed or Fail: Opportunity, Culture and the Struggle for Woman Suffrage Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  11. Barber B. 1984. Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
  12. Bartels LM. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  13. Bateman D, Katznelson I, Lapinski J. 2018. Southern Nation: Congress and White Supremacy after Reconstruction Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  14. Baumgartner FR, Jones BD. 1993. Agendas and the Instability of American Politics Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  15. Blackhawk M, Carpenter D, Resch T, Schneer B. 2021. Congressional representation by petition: assessing the voices of the voteless in a comprehensive new database, 1789–1949. Legis. Stud. Q. 46:817–49
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Brown C. 2006. Moral Capital: Foundations of British Abolitionism Chapel Hill: Univ. North Carol. Press
  17. Brown W. 2015. Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism's Stealth Revolution Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  18. Calhoun C, Gaonkar DP, Taylor C 2022. Degenerations of Democracy Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  19. Carpenter D. 2016. Recruitment by petition: American antislavery, French Protestantism, English suppression. Perspect. Politics 14:3700–23
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Carpenter D. 2020. Quand le pétitionnement contribue au façonnage de l'agenda politique: l'abolition de la tenure seigneuriale au Canada français, 1849–1854. Participations 3:28205–19. https://www.cairn.info/revue-participations-2020-3-page-205.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Carpenter D 2021. Democracy by Petition: Popular Politics in Transformation, 1790–1870 Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  22. Carpenter D, Brossard D. 2019. L'Éruption patriote: the revolt against Dalhousie and the petitioning explosion in nineteenth-century French Canada. Soc. Sci. Hist. 43:453–85
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Caughey D. 2018. The Unsolid South: Mass Politics and National Representation in a One-Party Enclave Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  24. Chan KN, Zhao S. 2015. Punctuated equilibrium and the information disadvantage of authoritarianism: evidence from the People's Republic of China. Policy Stud. J. 44:2134–55
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Chappell LA. 2002. Gendering Government: Feminist Engagement with the State in Australia and Canada Vancouver: Univ. Br. Columbia Press
  26. Cicero 1928. (54–51 BC). De Republica and De Legibus transl. C Keyes Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Cobb RW, Elder CD. 1971. The politics of agenda-building: an alternative for modern and democratic theory. J. Politics 33:4892–915
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Cornfield DB, Fletcher B. 1998. Institutional constraints on social movement ‘frame extension’: shifts in the legislative agenda of the American Federation of Labor, 1881–1955. Soc. Forces 76:41305–21
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Cox GW, McCubbins MD. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the U.S. House of Representatives New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  30. Dahl R. 1961. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  31. Dahl R. 1989. Democracy and Its Critics New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  32. Dietrich F, List C. 2017. Probabilistic opinion pooling generalized. Part one: general agendas. Soc. Choice Welfare 48:747–86
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Disch LJ. 2011. Toward a mobilization conception of democratic representation. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 105:1100–14
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Foner E. 1970. Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men. The Republican Party Before the Civil War New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  35. Forrester K. 2022. Feminist demands and the problem of housework. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 116:41278–92
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Francis MM. 2019. The price of civil rights: black lives, white funding, and movement capture. Law Soc. Rev. 53:1275–309
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Galbraith J. 1952. American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power Boston: Houghton Mifflin
  38. Gause L. 2022. The Advantage of Disadvantage: Costly Protest and Political Representation for Marginalized Groups New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  39. Gienapp W. 1987. The Rise of the Republican Party, 1852–1856 New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  40. Gilens M. 2012. Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  41. Gillion D. 2020. The Loud Minority: Why Protests Matter in American Democracy Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  42. Greenstone JD. 1969. Labor in American Politics New York: Knopf
  43. Gutmann A, Thompson D. 2004. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  44. Hacker JS, Pierson P. 2011. Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer—and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class New York: Basic Books
  45. Hall PA. 1993. Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comp. Politics 25:3275–96
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Hall RL, Deardorff A. 2006. Lobbying as legislative subsidy. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 100:169–84
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Hall RL, Wayman FW. 1990. Buying time: moneyed interests and the mobilization of bias in congressional committees. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 84:3797–820
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Hansen JM. 1991. Gaining Access: Congress and the Farm Lobby, 1919–1981 Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  49. Hertel-Fernandez A. 2019. State Capture: How Conservative Activists, Big Businesses, and Wealthy Donors Reshaped the American States—and the Nation Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  50. Howarth D, James S 2020. The politics of bank structural reform: business power and agenda setting in the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. Bus. Politics 22:125–51
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Htun M, Weldon SL. 2012. The civic origins of progressive policy change: combating violence against women in global perspective, 1975–2005. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 106:3548–69
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Jones BD. 1999. Bounded rationality. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 2:297–321
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Jones BD, Baumgartner FR. 2011. The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems Chicago: Univ Chicago Press
  54. Jones BD, Epp D, Baumgartner F. 2019a. Democracy, authoritarianism and policy punctuations. Int. Rev. Public Policy 1:17–26
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Jones BD, Larsen-Price H, Wilkerson J. 2009. Representation and American governing institutions. J. Politics 71:1 https://doi.org/10.1017/S002238160809018X
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Jones BD, Theriault S, Whyman M. 2019b. The Great Broadening: How the Vast Expansion of the Policymaking Agenda Transformed American Politics Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  57. Judge-Lord D. 2021. Public pressure campaigns and bureaucratic policymaking PhD Thesis, Univ. Wisc.–Madison
  58. Katznelson I. 2013. Fear Itself: The New Deal and the Origins of Our Time New York: W.W. Norton
  59. Kingdon J. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies Washington, DC: CQ Press
  60. Kitschelt H. 1993. Social movements, political parties, and democratic theory. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci. 528:113–29
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Krawiec KD. 2013. Don't “screw Joe the Plummer”: the sausage-making of financial reform. Ariz. Law Rev. 55:53–103
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Krehbiel K. 1998. Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  63. Krotoszynski RJ Jr 2012. Reclaiming the Petition Clause: Seditious Libel, “Offensive” Protest, and the Right to Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  64. Kruks-Wisner G 2018a. Claiming the State: Active Citizenship and Social Welfare in Rural India New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  65. Kruks-Wisner G. 2018b. The pursuit of social welfare: citizen claim-making in rural India. World Politics 70:1122–63
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Kruks-Wisner G. 2021. Great expectations, great grievances: the politics of citizens’ complaints in India. Comp. Politics 54:127–64
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Lee T. 2002. Mobilizing Public Opinion: Black Insurgency and Racial Attitudes in the Civil Rights Era Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  68. Levi M. 2003. Organizing power: the prospects for an American labor movement. Persp. Politics 1:145–68
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Libgober BD. 2020. Meetings, comments and the distributive politics of rulemaking. Q. J. Political Sci. 15:449–81
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Lieberman R. 1998. Shifting the Color Line: Race and the American Welfare State Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  71. Livy 1949. History of Rome Books III–IV, transl. BO Foster Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ Press
  72. Lukes S. 1974. Power: A Radical View New York: NYU Press
  73. Lupia A. 1992. Busy voters, agenda control, and the power of information. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 86:390–403
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Macedo S. 2000. Diversity and Distrust: Civic Education in a Multicultural Democracy Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  75. MacKinnon CK. 1989. Toward a Feminist theory of the State Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  76. Mansbridge J 2018. Recursive representation. Creating Political Presence: The New Politics of Democratic Representation D Castiglione, J Pollak 298–338. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
     [Google Scholar]
  77. McAdam D, Tarrow S, Tilly C 2001. Dynamics of Contention New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  78. McCombs ME, Shaw DL. 1972. The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opin. Q. 36:176–87
     [Google Scholar]
  79. McConnaughy C. 2013. The Woman Suffrage Movement in America: A Reassessment New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  80. McKinley M. 2018. Petitioning and the making of the administrative state. Yale Law J 127:1538–1637
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Mettler S. 2011. The Submerged State: How Invisible Government Policies Undermine American Democracy Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  82. Mickey R. 2015. Paths Out of Dixie: The Democratization of Authoritarian Enclaves in America's Deep South, 1944–1972 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  83. Millar F 2002. Rome, the Greek World and the East. Volume I: The Roman Republic and the Augustan Revolution HM Cotton, GM Rogers Chapel Hill: Univ. North Carol. Press
  84. Minow M. 2010. In Brown's Wake: Legacies of America's Educational Landmark New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  85. Montesquieu 1951 (1734. Considérations sur Les Causes de la Grandeur des Romain et de Leur Décadence. In Œuvres Complètes, Vol. II69–209. Paris: La Pléiade
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Montesquieu 1951 (1748. De l'Esprit des Lois. In Œuvres Complètes, Vol. II225–995. Paris: La Pléiade
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Pateman C. 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  88. Pettit P. 2012. On the People's Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  89. Pralle SB. 2003. Venue shopping, political strategy, and policy change: the internationalization of Canadian forest advocacy. J. Public Policy 23:3233–60
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Putterman E. 2005. Rousseau on the people as legislative gatekeepers, not framers. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 99:1145–51
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Riker W. 1986. The Art of Political Manipulation New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  92. Rodgers D. 1998. Atlantic Crossings: Social Politics in a Progressive Age Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  93. Romer T, Rosenthal H. 1978. Political resource allocation, controlled agendas, and the status quo. Public Choice 1978:27–43
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Rosenvallon P. 2006. La Contre-Démocratie: La Politique à l'Âge de la Défiance Paris: Seuil
  95. Sanders E. 1999. Roots of Reform: Farmers, Workers and the American State Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  96. Schattschneider EE. 1975 (1960). The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich
  97. Schickler E. 2016. Racial Realignment: The Transformation of American Liberalism, 1932–1965 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  98. Schneer B, Resch T, Blackhawk M, Carpenter D. 2022. The popular origins of legislative jurisdictions: petitions and standing committee formation in late colonial Virginia and the early U.S. House. J. Politics 84:31727–45
     [Google Scholar]
  99. Schlozman D. 2015. When Movements Anchor Parties: Electoral Alignments in American History Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  100. Shapiro I. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  101. Shields J. 2009. The Democratic Virtues of the Christian Right Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
  102. Simon HA. 1976. Administrative Behavior New York: Free Press. , 3rd ed..
  103. Sinha M. 2016. The Slave's Cause: A New History of Abolition New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  104. Skocpol T. 1992. Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  105. Skocpol T. 2006. Diminished Democracy: From Membership to Management in American Civil Life Norman: Univ. Okla. Press
  106. Skocpol T, Williamson V. 2012. The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  107. Sulkin T. 2005. Issue Politics in Congress New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  108. Szymanski AME. 2003. Pathways to Prohibition Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
  109. Tarrow S. 2022. Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics New York: Cambridge Univ. Press. , 4th ed..
  110. Thelen K. 2004. How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  111. Thurston C. 2018. At the Boundaries of Homeownership New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  112. Urbinati N. 2006. Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  113. Vauchez A, France P 2021. The Neoliberal Republic: Corporate Lawyers, Statecraft, and the Making of Public-Private France Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
  114. Vizenor G. 2008. Survivance: Narratives of Native Presence Lincoln: Univ. Nebr. Press
  115. Weingast B 1998. Political stability and civil war: institutions, commitment, and American democracy. Analytic Narratives R Bates, A Greif, M Levi, J-L Rosenthal, BR Weingast 148–93. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Wilentz S. 2003. The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln New York: Norton
  117. Witko C, Morgan J, Kelly NJ, Enns PK. 2021. Hijacking the Agenda: Economic Power and Political Influence New York: Russell Sage Found.
  118. Woodly D. 2015. The Politics of Common Sense: How Social Movements Use Public Discourse to Change Politics and Win Acceptance New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  119. Woodly D. 2021. Reckoning: Black Lives Matter and the Democratic Necessity of Social Movements Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Zaeske S. 2003. Signatures of Citizenship Chapel Hill: Univ. North Carol. Press
  121. Zahariadis N. 2016. Setting the agenda on agenda-setting: definitions, concepts and controversies. Handbook of Public Policy Agenda Setting N Zahariadis 1–22. London: Elgar.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. Zaret D. 2000. Origins of Democratic Culture: Printing, Petitions, and the Public Sphere in Early-Modern England Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  123. Ziblatt Z 2017. Conservative Parties and the Birth of Democracy New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533
Loading
Agenda Democracy
Annual Review of Political Science 26, 193 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error