After the “Master Theory”: Downs, Schattschneider, and the Rebirth of Policy-Focused Analysis

Abstract

Drawing on the pioneering work of Anthony Downs, political scientists have tended to characterize American politics as a game among undifferentiated competitors, played out largely through elections, with outcomes reflecting how formal rules translate election results into legislative votes. In this perspective, voters, campaigns, elections, and the ideological distribution of legislators merit extensive scrutiny. Other features of the political environment-most notably, the policies these legislators help create and the interest groups that struggle over these policies-are deemed largely peripheral. However, contemporary politics often looks very different than the world described by Downs. Instead, it more closely resembles the world depicted by E. E. Schattschneider-a world in which policy and groups loom large, the influence of voters is highly conditional, and the key struggle is not over gaining office but over reshaping governance. Over the last twenty years, a growing body of scholarship has emerged that advances this corrective vision-an approach we call "policy-focused political science." In this framework, politics is centrally about the exercise of government authority for particular substantive purposes. Such exercises of authority create the "terrain" for political struggle, profoundly shaping both individual and group political behavior. More important, because policies can be so consequential, they also serve as the "prize" for many of the most enduring political players, especially organized interest groups. The payoffs of a policy-focused perspective include a more accurate portrayal of the institutional environment of modern politics, an appreciation for the fundamental importance of organized groups, a better understanding of the dynamics of policy change, and a more accurate mapping of interests, strategies, and influence. These benefits are illustrated through brief examinations of two of the biggest changes in American politics over the last generation: asymmetric partisan polarization and the growing concentration of income at the top.

Interest Group Activists and the Polarization of State Legislatures

“…Indeed, extended networks are not unfamiliar to political science; a long tradition of research has defined political parties as coalitions of policy‐demanding groups in society (Achen and Bartels ; Bawn et al. ; Hacker and Pierson ; Karol ; Key ; Masket ; Schattschneider ; Truman ).…”

Do Politicians Use Policy to Make Politics? The Case of Public-Sector Labor Laws

“…What should we expect? An answer inevitably turns on the specific nature of the policy itself (Hacker and Pierson, 2014).…”

“…1 In his classic study of the Smoot-Hawley tariff, Schattschneider (1935) famously argued that policies make their own politics. Scholars in American political development, public policy, and comparative politics have since brought this notion to the theoretical center of their work and have provided considerable evidence that he was right (Hacker and Pierson, 2014).The adoption of Social Security, for example, created a constituency of senior citizens so supportive of the program that it became politically untouchable (Campbell, 2003). The adoption of airline deregulation led to a restructuring of the airline industry that transformed the interests of the major players, giving them incentives to support a deregulated system that most had initially opposed (Patashnik, 2008).…”

“…1 In his classic study of the Smoot-Hawley tariff, Schattschneider (1935) famously argued that policies make their own politics. Scholars in American political development, public policy, and comparative politics have since brought this notion to the theoretical center of their work and have provided considerable evidence that he was right (Hacker and Pierson, 2014).…”

Agenda Setting in Comparative Perspective

“…Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson (2014) have recently commented on the decline of the Downsian perspective and the rise of a new, policy-focused perspective within political science. Agenda Setting, Policies, and Political Systems proposes a more complete political science, one that accepts the challenge of the critics of pluralism rather than flees from it as an insurmountable obstacle.…”