Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:12:09.849Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

E. E. Schattschneider, the New Deal, and the Rejection of the Responsible Party Doctrine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Sidney M. Milkis*
Affiliation:
Brandeis University

Extract

E. E. Schattschneider's Party Government, published fifty years ago, is one of the early classics of behavioral political science. The enduring popularity of this book, however, stems less from its impressive analysis of the actual workings of American party politics than its advocacy of democratic reform. Party Government was a strong blow in behalf of “responsible party government,” a creed that has had an important influence on political science. Schattschneider later chaired the Committee on Political Parties of the American Political Science Association, which produced the famous report “Towards a More Responsible Two-Party System,” published in 1950. Much of the argument of the report was anticipated by Party Government, which advocated “party centralization” to overcome the local and sectional tendencies that defined traditional partisan politics in the United States (Schattschneider 1942; Committee on Political Parties 1950).

Schattschneider considered political parties as perhaps the most archaic institutions in the United States: the American party system continued to operate as it had before the Civil War, that is, as two loose coalitions of state and local organizations, with very little national machinery and cohesion. The major parties were able to control the electoral process and bring people to the polls. Nevertheless, they failed to organize the nominees they elected to office into an effective, cohesive team for control of government. “Nearly all of the conflict and confusion of American government,” Schattschneider (1942, 30) claimed, “can be traced to the failure of the parties on this point.”

With the growth of the federal government's responsibilities during the twentieth century, this failing of the traditional decentralized parties represented a distressing deterioration of representative democracy.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1992

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

Brownlow, Louis. 1943. “Perfect Union.” Appendix of Official Files 101 and 101b. Hyde Park, NY: Franklin D. Roosevelt Library.Google Scholar
Committee on Political Parties. 1950. “Toward a More Responsible Two-Party System.” American Political Science Review XLIV: 3, 2.Google Scholar
Congressional Record. 1938. 75th Cong., 3rd sess. 5121.Google Scholar
Croly, Herbert. 1914. Progressive Democracy. New York: McMillan.Google Scholar
Guliek, Luther. 1933. “Politics, Administration, and the New Deal.” The Annals, September.Google Scholar
Harris, Joseph. 1936. “Outline for a New York Conference.” Papers of the President's Committee on Administrative Management, Hyde Park, NY: Franklin D. Roosevelt Library.Google Scholar
La Follette, Philip F., Bensen, Elmer and Murphey, Frank. 1938. “Why We Lost.” The Nation, December.Google Scholar
Merriam, Charles Edward. 1931. “The Written and Unwritten Constitution,” in The Party Battle, ed. Merriam, Charles Edward. New York: Arno Press.Google Scholar
Nathan, Richard. 1983. The Administrative Presidency. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
New York Times, 24 October 1940.Google Scholar
Roosevelt, Franklin D. 19381950. Public Papers and Addresses. 13 vols., ed. Rosenman, Samuel I.. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E. E. 1942. Party Government. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, Inc.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E. E. 1948. The Struggle for Party Government. College Park: The University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Stokes, Thomas. 1940. Chip Off My Shoulder. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Young, James Sterling, and Riley, Russell L. 1990. “Party Government and Political Culture.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.Google Scholar