Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-nwzlb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-26T14:48:21.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparative Perspectives on Inequality and the Quality of Democracy in the United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2011

Alfred Stepan
Affiliation:
Columbia University
Juan J. Linz
Affiliation:
Yale University

Extract

When Jeffrey Isaac approached us to review some recent works in American politics from a comparative perspective, we gladly accepted the task, believing it important to help overcome what some see as the “splendid isolation” of American politics. Indeed, the invitation arrived at a propitious time because, after completing our most recent book, we critically reflected on the fact that we had unfortunately written almost nothing on the oldest, and one of the most diverse, democracies in the world, the United States. We thus agreed to contribute some thoughts on the matter, recognizing the limits of our knowledge of the entire field of American politics, but acknowledging, too, our belief that the current distancing of the study of America from the analysis of other democracies impoverishes modern political science.

Type
Review Essay
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1995. The Europa World Year Book, 1995. London: Europa Publications.Google Scholar
Ackerman, Bruce. 2010. “How Biden Could Fix the Senate.” American Prospect, March 15.Google Scholar
Atkinson, Anthony, Rainwater, Lee, and Smeeding, Timothy. 1995. Income Distribution in OECD Countries: Evidence from the Luxembourg Income Study. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Beth, Richard, Heitshusen, Valeria, and Palmer, Betsy. 2010. “Filibusters and Cloture in the Senate.” Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
Blanden, Jo, Gregg, Paul, and Machin, Stephen. 2005. “Intergenerational Mobility in Europe and North America.” Report. London: Centre for Economic Performance (http://cep.lse.ac.uk/about/news/IntergenerationalMobility.pdf), accessed May 27, 2011.Google Scholar
Blaustein, A. P., and Flanz, G. H., eds. 1991. Constitutions of the Countries of the World. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications.Google Scholar
Brandolini, Andrea, and Smeeding, Timothy M.. 2006. “Patterns of Economic Inequality in Western Democracies: Some Facts and Trends.” PS: Political Science & Politics 39: 2126.Google Scholar
Corak, Miles. 2006. “Do Poor Children Become Poor Adults? Lessons from a Cross Country Comparison of Generational Earnings Mobility.” IZA DP No. 1993, Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn, March.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 2001. How Democratic Is the American Constitution? New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Elazar, Daniel et al. 1994. Federal Systems of the World. Harlow, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Finer, Samuel E., Bogdanor, Vernon, and Rudden, Bernard. 1995. Comparing Constitutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 2009. Disconnect: The Breakdown of Representation in American Politics. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Hacker, Jacob S., and Pierson, Paul. 2010. Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer—and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Hertz, Tom. 2006. “Understanding Mobility in America.” Report Center for American Progress, April.Google Scholar
Hochschild, Jennifer. 1981. What's Fair? American Beliefs about Distributive Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 2001. Development and Crisis of the Welfare State: Parties and Policies in Global Markets. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Immergut, Ellen M. 1992. “The Rules of the Game: The Logic of Health Policy-Making in France, Switzerland and Sweden.” In Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis, ed. Steinmo, Sven, Thelen, Kathleen, and Longstreth, Frank. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 5789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jäntti, Markus. 2009. “Mobility in the United States in Comparative Perspective.” Focus 26 (2): 3842.Google Scholar
Katzenstein, Mary, Ibrahim, Leila Mohsen, and Rubin, Katharine D.. 2010. “Felony Disenfranchisement and the Dark Side of American Liberalism.” Perspectives on Politics 8 (4): 10351054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koger, Gregory. 2010. Filibustering: A Political History of Obstruction in the House and Senate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lindert, Peter. 2000. “Three Centuries of Inequality in Britain and America.” In Handbook of Income Distribution, ed. Atkinson, A. B. and Bourguignon, F.. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, pp. 167216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LIS. 2011. LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg. (http://www.lisdatacenter.org/), accessed May 27, 2011.Google Scholar
Lutz, Donald S. 1994. “Toward a Theory of Constitutional Amendment.” American Political Science Review 88 (20): 355–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maioni, Antonia. 1998. Parting at the Crossroads: The Emergence of Health Insurance in the United States and Canada. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, David. 2010. “Legislative Obstruction.” Perspectives on Politics 8 (4): 1145–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazumder, Bhaskar. 2008. “Upward Intergenerational Mobility in the United States.” Economic Mobility Project, Pew Charitable Trusts.Google Scholar
Obinger, Herbert, Leibfried, Stephan, and Castels, Francis G., eds. 2005. Federalism and the Welfare State: New World and European Experiences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development. 2009. OECD Factbook 2009: Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development. 2010. OECD Health Data 2010. Paris: OECD Publishing. (http://www.oecd.org/health/healthdata), accessed May 27, 2011.Google Scholar
Orren, Karen, and Skowronek, Stephen. 1986. “Editor's Preface.” Studies in American Political Development 1 (1): vii–viii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rainwater, Lee. 1997. “Inequality and Poverty in Comparative Perspective.” Estudio/Working Paper 1997/110. Madrid: Institute Juan March. (http://www.march.es/ceacs/publicaciones/working/archivos/1997_110.pdf), accessed May 27, 2011.Google Scholar
Samuels, David, and Snyder, Richard. 2001. “The Value of a Vote: Mal-apportionment in Comparative Perspective.” British Journal of Political Science 31: 651–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Robert, and Jacobs, Lawrence. 2011. “The Democratic Paradox: Waning of Popular Sovereignty and the Pathologies of American Politics.” In The Oxford Handbook of American Public Opinion, ed. Shapiro, Robert and Jacobs, Lawrence. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 713–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stepan, Alfred. 2004. “Electorally Generated Veto Players in Unitary and Federal Systems.” In Federalism and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Gibson, Edward L.. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 2984.Google Scholar
Stepan, Alfred. N.d.“Fernando Henrique Cardoso: The Structural-Historical Scholar-President.” In a volume to be edited by Dietrich Rueschemeyer and Richard Snyder. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Stepan, Alfred, and Linz, Juan J.. N.d.“The ‘Deserving’ Disenfranchised: Felons and Ex-Felons.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Stepan, Alfred, Linz, Juan J., and Yadav, Yogendra. 2011. Crafting State-Nations: India and Other Multinational Democracies. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsebelis, George. 1995. “Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism.” British Journal of Political Science 25 (3): 289325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsebelis, George, and Money, J., 1997. Bicameralism. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Udall, Tom. 2011. “The Constitutional Option: Reforming the Rules of the Senate to Restore Accountability and Reduce Gridlock.” Harvard Law and Policy Review 5(1): 901–19.Google Scholar
United Nations Development Programme. 2010. Human Development Report, 2010. New York: Palgrave Macmillan (http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2010/), accessed May 27, 2011.Google Scholar
US Census Bureau. 2010. “Household Income for States: 2008 and 2009.” (http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/acsbr09-2.pdf), accessed May 27, 2011.Google Scholar
US Census Bureau. 2011. American Community Survey, 2009. (http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/2009_release/), accessed May 27, 2011.Google Scholar
Wawro, Gregory J. 2011. “The Supermajority Senate.” In The Oxford Handbook of the American Congress, ed. Schikler, Eric and Lee, Francis E.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 426450.Google Scholar
Wawro, Gregory J., and Schikler, Eric. 2006. Filibuster: Obstruction and Law Making in the U.S. Senate. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Whitaker, Joseph. 1997. Whitaker's Almanack, 1998. London: Atationery Office.Google Scholar
World Health Organization. 2010. “Trends in maternal mortality: 1990 to 2008: Estimates developed by WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA and The World Bank.” Report. (http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/monitoring/9789241500265/en/), accessed May 27, 2011.Google Scholar