Politics, Pressures and the Tariff: A Study of Free Private Enterprise in Pressure Politics, as Shown in the 1929-1930 Revision of the Tariff

Volwiler, A. T.; Schattschneider, E. E.

doi:10.2307/1886418

Cited by 28 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Political scientists have long noted the advantageous position of business firms in the polity (Coen & Vannoni, 2020; Epstein, 1969; Fouirnaies & Hall, 2018; Lenway, 1985; Martin & Swank, 2012; Schattschneider, 1963; Vogel, 1989; Werner, 2012). The organizational literature also highlights the many benefits that firms enjoy from affiliating with public officials through their corporate political activity (CPA) (Bonardi et al, 2006; Choi et al, 2015; Doh et al, 2012; Hillman, 2005; Holburn & Vanden Bergh, 2014).…”

Section: Visit Benefits: Autonomy or Legitimacy?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stock market reactions to firm visits by presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush through Donald J. Trump

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine stock market reactions to public company visits and the public comments made therein by five presidents (George H. W. Bush through Donald J. Trump) over three decades (from 1989 to 2019). We find striking evidence that investors value these visits during periods of unified government or when the president announces favorable policy. However, a president's praise during the visit and his popularity at the time of the visit do not appear to have an impact on investors’ reactions. Our findings suggest that investors value affiliation with the president only when they perceive opportunities to obtain substantive policy benefits.

show abstract

Section: Visit Benefits: Autonomy or Legitimacy?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stock market reactions to firm visits by presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush through Donald J. Trump

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Not only does "policy beget politics," but it also begets future policy by informing and shaping institutions (e.g. Schattschneider 1935;Lowi 1964;Moynihan and Soss 2014), as no policy is introduced and implemented in a vacuum. Rather, it comes to be in a policyscape already structured by prior policies and institutions, such that what comes next either intentionally or unintentionally incorporates what came beforeor directly confronts it (Mettler 2016).…”

Section: Historical Institutions To Today's Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional legacies and temporary assistance for needy families spending decisions: the case of the Freedmen’s Bureau

Lowder,

Hobert,

Shoub

2023

J. Pub. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) was born out of the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act in the backdrop of highly racialised and otherizing fears about the mythical “welfare queen.” However, the perception of Black exploitation of public benefits to White detriment is not exclusively a modern phenomenon. One of its original manifestations can be found in White reactions to the Freedmen’s Bureau during the post-Civil War period of Reconstruction. We therefore argue that state decisions to allocate spending towards cash assistance and coercive programmes designed to motivate work participation and regulate private behaviour are shaped by the imprint of this historic institution. Using TANF spending data from 2001 to 2019 and data on Freedmen’s Bureau field offices, we find evidence of a link between these offices’ historic prevalence and contemporary, coercive allocations. However, we find little evidence that this link extends to spending towards cash assistance.

show abstract

“…Yet, even if these circumstances call for significant scholarly attention to understand policy decisions and outputs, the foundational literature and associated research trajectories are only somewhat helpful in reconciling the contradiction between collaboration and competition (Thomas, 2001). On the one the hand, we have the sociological studies of politics (Lipset & Rokkan, 1967) or the economics approach of Downs (1957) with a focus on party‐voter interactions, on the other, we have those following Schattschneider's (1935) emphasis on politics as a battle of interests fighting for their preferences. In brief, parties and interest group research evolved as separate fields (Heaney 2010; Thomas, 2001; Witko, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Party‐interest group ties: The resource exchange model revisited

Allern

Hansen

Marshall

et al. 2023

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the existence and strength of organizational ties between parties and interest groups by innovating on classic resource exchange theory. First, we propose that the nature of interest groups’ policy orientation and their general organizational capacity primarily explain the presence of ties, that is, ties are less likely to materialize when groups lack ideological policy goals and have limited organizational capacity. Second, the size and types of resources on offer from both sides are what principally account for the strength of existing ties. We hypothesize that resources from both parties and interest groups are positively associated with institutionalized relationships, but also that resources are hierarchically ordered, that is, resources that are exclusive for the transaction are particularly important for ties at higher levels of institutionalization. Using data from a novel organizational survey of parties and interest groups in seven Western democracies, we find support for the hypotheses using an integrated design of analysis.

show abstract

Politics, Pressures and the Tariff: A Study of Free Private Enterprise in Pressure Politics, as Shown in the 1929-1930 Revision of the Tariff

Cited by 28 publications

References 0 publications

Stock market reactions to firm visits by presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush through Donald J. Trump

Stock market reactions to firm visits by presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush through Donald J. Trump

Institutional legacies and temporary assistance for needy families spending decisions: the case of the Freedmen’s Bureau

Party‐interest group ties: The resource exchange model revisited

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About