Bringing Public Opinion and Electoral Politics Back In: Explaining the Fate of “Clintonomics” and Its Contemporary Relevance

Patrick Akard , “ Where Are All the Democrats? The Limits of Economic Policy Reform,” in Social Policy and the Conservative Agenda, eds. Clarence Y. H. Lo and Michael Schwartz (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1998); Thomas Ferguson , Golden Rule: The Investment Theory of Party Competition and the Logic of Money-Driven Political Systems (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995).

Mark Blyth , Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002); Ravi K. Roy and Arthur T. Denzau , Fiscal Policy Convergence from Reagan to Blair (New York: Routledge, 2004).

This is true even for authors who include public opinion as one factor in their explanations of the scaling back of Clinton's public investment program. See M. Stephen Weatherford and Lorraine M. McDonnell , “Clinton and the Economy: The Paradox of Policy Success and Political Mishap” Political Science Quarterly 111, no. 3 (1996): 403—36; and Paul Pierson , “The Deficit and the Politics of Domestic Reform,” in The Social Divide: Political Parties and the Future of Activist Government, ed. Margaret Weir (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1998).

See R. Douglas Arnold , The Logic of Congressional Action (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990); John Geer , From Tea Leaves to Opinion Polls: A Theory of Democratic Leadership (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996); Robert S. Erikson , Michael B. MacKuen , and James A. Stimson , The Macro Polity (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002); Paul Burstein , “The Impact of Public Opinion on Policy: A Review and an Agenda” Political Research Quarterly 56, no. 1 (March 2003): 29—40; and Christopher Wlezien and Stuart N. Soroka , “ The Relationship Between Public Opinion and Policy” in The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, eds. Russell J. Dalton and Hans-Dieter Klingemann (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). For a variety of contrasting views on the causal importance of public opinion, see Jeff Manza, Fay Lomax Cook, and Benjamin I. Page, eds., Navigating Public Opinion: Polls, Policy, and the Future of American Democracy ( New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). In this article, I am narrowly concerned with public economic opinion and its impact on the making of economic policy. The public, of course, also has many non-economic opinions that have their own influence on the making of others kinds of policy.

For development of V. O. Key's concept of “latent opinion,” see John Zaller , “ Coming to Grips with V. O. Key's Concept of Latent Opinion,” in Electoral Democracy, eds. Michael B. MacKuen and George Rabinowitz (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press , 2003), especially 326—28. On the similar concept of “potential preferences,” see Arnold, The Logic of Congressional Action.

On the “public mood” see James A. Stimson , Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and Swings, 2nd ed. (Boulder: CO: Westview Press, 1999). The public mood is measured by statistically aggregating individual responses to thousands of public opinion poll questions. This is said to cancel or filter out the error, incoherence, randomness, and instability of individual preferences.

See Arnold, The Logic of Congressional Action.

On political orders, see David Plotke , Building a Democratic Political Order: Reshaping American Liberalism in the 1930s and 1940s ( New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996). On the similar concept of partisan “regimes,” see Stephen Skowronek , The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to Bill Clinton (Cambridge, MA: Belknap/Harvard University Press, 1997).

The literature on the role of ideas in politics is growing rapidly. For a recent work on the strategic use of ideas in economic policymaking, see Mark A. Smith , The Right Talk: How Conservatives Transformed the Great Society Into the Ownership Society (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007).

On discourse coalitions, see Otto Singer , “Policy Communities and Discourse Coalitions,” Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 11, no. 4 (1990): 428—58.

For a similar view of this process, see M. Stephen Weatherford , “ After the Critical Election: Presidential Leadership, Competition and the Consolidation of the New Deal Realignment,” British Journal of Political Science 32, no. 2 (2002): 221—57.

On these three types of change, see Jack Knight , Institutions and Social Conflict (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992).

On the role of these and other influences in determining party positions, see Bernard Grofman , “Downs and Two-Party Convergence,” Annual Review of Political Science 7 ( 2004): 25—46.

On the role of swing voters in American presidential elections, see William G. Mayer , “ The Swing Voter in American Presidential Elections,” American Politics Research 35, no. 3 (May 2007): 358—88.

On culture as a “tool kit” or “tool box,” see respectively Ann Swidler , “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies,” American Sociological Review 51 (1986): 273—86; and J. David Greenstone , “ Political Culture and Political Development,” Studies in American Political Development 1 ( 1986):1-49.

See Bryan Jones , Reconceiving Decision-Making in Democratic Politics: Attention, Choice, and Public Policy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994).

From the large and diverse literature on framing, see Dennis Chong and James N. Druckman , “Framing Theory,” Annual Review of Political Science 10 (2007): 103—26.

For the next three paragraphs, see J. Craig Jenkins and Craig M. Eckert , “The Corporate Elite, the New Conservative Policy Network, and Reaganomics,” Critical Sociology 16, no. 2-3 (1989), 121—44; and Robert M. Collins , More: The Politics of Economic Growth in Postwar America ( New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).

On the rise of neoliberalism in the United States, see Monica Prasad , The Politics of Free Markets: The Rise of Neoliberal Economic Policies in Britain, France, Germany, and the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006).

See Stimson , Public Opinion in America, 69—70.

Linda L.M. Bennett and Stephen Earl Bennett , “Looking at Leviathan: Dimensions of Opinion About Big Government,” in Broken Contract? Changing Relations Between Americans and Their Government , ed. Stephen C. Craig ( Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996 ), 31—33. See also William G. Mayer , The Changing American Mind: How and Why Public Opinion Changed between 1960 and 1988 (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1992).

American political development scholars have demonstrated that there are actually “multiple traditions” or elements—liberal, republican, communitarian, egalitarian, populist, and exclusionist—within American political culture. But as James Morone argues, in the narrower economic sphere, the liberal, individualist, pro-market element is dominant. James A. Morone , “ Storybook Truths about America,” Studies in American Political Development 19, no. 2 (Fall 2005): 216—25.

Following Stephen Skowronek, presidents of “reconstruction” are elected in times of turmoil when the old regime is exhausted. They then proceed to transform the political landscape. Skowronek also writes of presidents of “preemption” and “articulation,” terms that will be used later. See Skowronek, The Politics That Presidents Make.

Thomas Ferguson and Joel Rogers , Right Turn : The Decline of the Democrats and the Future of American Politics ( New York: Hill and Wang, 1986), 78—137; W. Elliott Brownlee and C. Eugene Steuerle , “Taxation,” in The Reagan Presidency: Pragmatic Conservatism and Its Legacies, eds. W. Elliott Brownlee and Hugh Davis Graham (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2003).

On Democratic support for balanced budgets, see Roy and Denzau , Fiscal Policy Convergence; and James Savage, Balanced Budgets and American Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988).

See many of the articles in Brownlee and Graham, The Reagan Presidency.

See Barry Bluestone and Bennett Harrison , The Deindustrialization of America (New York: Basic Books, 1992); Lester Thurow , The Zero-Sum Society ( New York: Basic Books, 1980); Robert Reich , The Next American Frontier (New York: Crown, 1983); and Felix Rohatyn , The Twenty-Year Century (New York: Random House , 1983).

For the best account of this episode, see Otis L. Graham, Jr. , Losing Time: The Industrial Policy Debate (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992).

Graham , Losing Time, 166.

See Robert Reich , The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for Twentieth Century Capitalism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1991); Lester Thurow , Head to Head: The Coming Battle among Europe, Japan and America (New York: Warner Books, 1992); and Laura D'Andrea Tyson , Who's Bashing Whom: Trade Conflict in High Technology Industries (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1992).

For this paragraph and the next, see Bob Woodward , The Agenda: Inside the Clinton White House (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994), 35—39.

For additional analysis of the origins of Clinton's strategy and its fate, see Collins, More, pp. 214—21; Blyth, Great Transformations, 195—201; and Akard, “Where Are All the Democrats?”

Stimson , Public Opinion in America, 124—25.

According to American National Election Study data, support for more government services grew from 24 percent in 1982 to 31 percent in 1992. Eric Lotke, Robert Gerson , Paul Waldman , and Andrew Seifter , “The Progressive Majority: Why a Conservative America Is a Myth,” Campaign for America's Future and Media Matters for America (2007), 4, retrieved from http://home.ourfuture.org/assets/20070612_theprogressivemajority_report.pdf .

Ferguson , “ `Real Change'?”; Paul Starobin , “An Affair to Remember,” National Journal (January 16, 1993): 120—24; Sidney Blumenthal , “ The Reanointed,” The New Republic (July 27, 1992): 12.

See Akard , “ Where Are All the Democrats?”; and Starobin , “An Affair to Remember”

Kenneth Baer , Reinventing Democrats (Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press, 2000).

Woodward , The Agenda, 41.

E.J. Dionne , Jr., “As an Issue, The Deficit Doesn't Play in Peoria, Political Pros Warn,” The Washington Post (September 29, 2002).

On the battle over Clinton's economic program in 1993, see Woodward , The Agenda; Collins, More; Akard , “Where Are the Democrats?”; Pierson , “ The Deficit”; Weatherford and McDonnell , “ Clinton and the Economy”; and Elizabeth Drew , On The Edge: The Clinton Presidency (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994). Unless otherwise noted, the following account is based on these sources.

James S. Savage , “Deficits and the Economy: The Case of the Clinton Administration and Interest Rates,” Public Budgeting & Finance 14, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 96—112.

Martin Walker , The President We Deserve: Bill Clinton: His Rise, Fall, and Comebacks (New York: Crown Publishers, 1996), 169.

William Schneider , “Clinton Needs to Woo Perot Voters, ” The Boston Herald (January 16, 1993).

“What Voters Said Today” The Public Perspective 4, no. 2 (January/February 1993): 90. In another poll taken during the last week of the campaign, 40 percent of all voters said that reducing the federal deficit should be the most important thing for the next president to accomplish—significantly more than the number who cited reducing unemployment (31 percent) or controlling health care costs (14 percent). Carroll Doherty , “Do Deficits Matter Anymore? Apparently Not to the Public” Pew Research Center (March 14, 2006), retrieved from http://pewresearch.org/obdeck/?ObDeckID=10.Similarly,inamid-JanuaryWashingtonPost/ABCNewspoll, 45 percent agreed that deficit reduction should be Clinton's top economic goal. Richard Morin , “Great Expectations: Survey Finds Optimism Is High for Clinton on Host of Problems ,” The Washington Post (January 19, 1993). Several other polls found very little support for increased spending on transportation and communications infrastructure programs of the kind Clinton proposed in his investment strategy. See Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Michael K. Frisby , “ Clinton Previews His Administration,” The Wall Street Journal (December 18, 1991).

See the comments from an article by DLC activists and Clinton domestic policy aides Elaine Kamarck and William Galston cited in Fred Barnes , “The Undead ,” The New Republic (February 1, 1993 ): 21—22. See also Ronald B. Rapoport and Walter Stone , Three's A Crowd: The Dynamic of Third Parties, Ross Perot, and Republican Resurgence ( Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2005), 146.

Drew , On the Edge, 60—61.

Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Michael K. Frisby , “Clinton Previews His Administration,” The Wall Street Journal (November 18, 1992).

Woodward , The Agenda, 140.

Telephone interview with Leon Panetta, August 9, 2007.

Communication from Alan Blinder, August 14, 2007. Noting that “I have a hard time parsing `credit' between” the two explanations, Blinder adds that “If forced, I'd put more weight on #2,” the Perot factor. But Leon Panetta and former Clinton Domestic Policy Council member and DLC activist William Galston come down in favor of the primacy of financial market confidence, while Galston's fellow Domestic Policy Council member, DLC activist, and frequent co-author Elaine Kamarck argues that both factors were at work. Telephone interview with Leon Panetta, August 9, 2007. Communications from William Galston and Elaine Kamarck, July 31 and July 30, 2007, respectively.

Communication from Alan Blinder, August 14, 2007.

Drew , On the Edge, 81.

Kenneth T. Walsh , Gloria Borger , and Matthew Cooper , “Public Fever for New Budget Cuts,” U.S. News & World Report (March 1, 1993): 30. A Washington Post poll similarly found that 57 percent of those surveyed said Clinton went too far in raising taxes on the middle class. Three out of four said Clinton didn't go far enough to cut spending, while two out of three said he did not go far enough to reduce the deficit. Dan Balz and Richard Morin , “Clinton Plan Enjoys Strong Public Support; Poll Finds Anti-Washington Mood Remains ,” The Washington Post (March 2, 1993 ).

Drew , On the Edge, 82.

“If we don't have a lower deficit, it's going to be impossible for guys like me to get re-elected” fretted Sen. Dennis DeConcini of Arizona. Gloria Borger , “Strangers in a Strange Land” U.S. News & World Report (March 22, 1993): 27.

Woodward , The Agenda, 163.

Ann Reilly Dowd , “How to Get Things Done in Washington ,” Fortune (August 9, 1993): 60—62.

William Schneider , “Whatever Happened to Clintonomics?, ” National Journal (June 26, 1993): 1680. According to a bipartisan poll conducted by the Tarrance Group and Mellman-Lazarus-Lake, Clinton had a 45 percent—37 percent advantage over the Republicans on taxes just before he took office, but by late April the Republicans had regained a 60 percent—28 percent advantage. Thomas B. Edsall, “Clinton Loses Focus— And Time,” The Washington Post (May 2, 1993 ).

Alec Gallup and Lydia Saad , “ Clinton Back to Square One,” Gallup Poll Monthly (August 1993): 9.

Gallup Poll Monthly (August 1993): 14.

The new cuts were concentrated in the areas of education and training. Clinton's proposed civilian research and development initiatives were also substantially reduced, while his physical capital proposals were trimmed the least. The outcome could have been still worse. Furious efforts by Clinton economic aide Gene Sperling succeeded in upping the 1994 level of investments from the meager $1 billion approved in the earlier budget resolutions to $11 billion by taking money from other programs. Woodward, The Agenda, 324.

Richard Benedetto , “Plan `fair, will work'; Public Not Sold ,” USA Today (August 4, 1993).

David S. Broder , “Doubts Persist on Budget Plan,” The Washington Post (August 10, 1993).

Flavio Romano , Clinton and Blair: The Political Economy of the Third Way (New York: Taylor & Francis), 67—68.

See Jeff Faux , The Party's Not Over: A New Vision for the Democrats (New York: Basic Books, 1996); Robert B. Reich , Locked in the Cabinet ( New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997); and Barry Bluestone and Bennett Harrison , Growing Prosperity: The Battle for Growth with Equity in the Twenty-First Century (New York: Houghton, Mifflin, 2000).

See especially Bluestone and Harrison, Growing Prosperity.

John B. Judis , “From Hell,” The New Republic (December 19, 1994): 14—19.

Gary C. Jacobson , “The 1994 House Elections in Perspective ,” in Midterm: Elections of 1994 in Context, ed. Philip A. Klinkner (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996).

Stimson , Public Opinion in America, 125—27.

Lotke , et al., “ The Progressive Majority” 4.

Republican pollster Ed Goes found that 78 percent of voters thought government was too intrusive and 79 percent thought the federal government was too powerful. A report by the Wirthlin Group found that 71 percent agreed that “government is not the answer— government is the problem,” and half said they would like to see the power of the federal government reduced. Clyde Wilcox , The Latest American Revolution? The 1994 Elections and Their Implications for Governance (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1995), 24—25.

Rapoport and Stone , Three's a Crowd , 181.

David W. Brady , John F. Cogan , Brian J. Gaines , and Douglas Rivers , “The Perils of Presidential Support: How the Republicans Took the House in the 1994 Midterm Elections,” Political Behavior 18, no. 4 (1996): 345—67.

Sung Deuk Hahm, Mark S. Kamlet , and David C. Mowery , “Postwar Deficit Spending in the United States,” American Politics Quarterly 25, no. 2 (April 1997): 139—67.

See the classic work by Lloyd A. Free and Hadley Cantril , The Political Beliefs of Americans (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press , 1967).

For these estimates, see respectively Albert H. Cantril and Susan Davis Cantril , Reading Mixed Signals: Ambivalence in American Public Opinion About Government (Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 1999), 20; and James A. Stimson , Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 90.

William G. Jacoby , “Issue Framing and Public Opinion on Government Spending,” American Journal of Political Science 44, no. 4 (October 2000 ): 750—67.

George Edwards , On Deaf Ears : The Limits of The Bully Pulpit (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003).

For the Hamilton Project's key ideas, see Roger C. Altman , Jason E. Bordoff , Peter R. Orszag , and Robert E. Rubin , “An Economic Strategy to Advance Opportunity, Prosperity, and Growth,” The Hamilton Project (April 2006), retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2006/04useconomics_altman/THP_Strategy.pdf. See also Lawrence Summers , “Harness Market Forces to Share Prosperity,” Financial Times (June 24, 2007); Alan S. Blinder , “Offshoring: The Next Industrial Revolution?,” Foreign Affairs 85, no. 2 (March/April 2006); and Gene Sperling , The Pro-Growth Progressive: An Economic Strategy for Shared Prosperity (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2005).

See Jeff Faux , The Global Class War (New York: Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2006); Robert Kuttner , The Squandering of America: How the Failure of Our Politics Undermines Our Prosperity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007); Bernard Schwartz and Sherle Schwenninger , “Public Investment Works,” Democracy, no. 6 (Fall 2007): 50—60; Joseph Stiglitz , Making Globalization Work (New York: W.W. Norton, 2006); James K. Galbraith , “What Kind of Economy?,” The Nation (March 5, 2007), and articles by Palley, Madrick , and others in Challenge 50, no. 6 (November-December, 2007).

Frank Davies , “Science Research Get Boost in Funding ,” San Jose Mercury News (August 3, 2007); Lori Montgomery , “Aid May Grow for Laid-Off Workers ,” The Washington Post (July 23, 2007 ); Katrina Vanden Heuvel , “A New New Deal,” The Nation (August 8, 2007), retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?bid=7&pid=221239.

David Leonhardt , “Assessing the Advisers in the '08 Race ,” The New York Times (April 18, 2007 ).

See James K. Galbraith, “Breaking Out of the Deficit Trap: The Case Against the Fiscal Hawks” (Annandale, NY: The Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, 2005); and Joseph Stiglitz, “Getting Beyond Balanced Budget Mania and Addressing the Nation's Needs,” retrieved from http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_viewpoints_beyond_balanced_budget_mania.

The same poll also found clear majorities in support of a strong, more active government. Lotke , et al., “The Progressive Majority” 4—5.

Jonathan Weisman , “ Taxes, Health Lead Hill Agenda,” The Washington Post (October 1, 2007).

Al Quinlan , Mike Bocian , Stan Greenberg , and James Carville , “Getting the Public to Listen,” Democracy Corps (February 28, 2007), retrieved from http://www.democracycorps .com/reports/analyses/Democracy_Corps_February_28_2007_Memo.pdf; Ruy Teixeira, “Snapshot: Battle of the Budget,” The Century Foundation” (October 12, 2007), summarizing data from another September 2007 Hart Research poll, retrieved from http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1704. See also the results of a February 2006 CNN/Gallup/USA Today survey, retrieved from National Journal Poll Track, http://www.nationaljournal.com.

Los Angeles Times and NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll data cited in Lotke , et al., “The Progressive Majority,” 9.

“ Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987—2007—Political Landscape More Favorable to Democrats,” The Pew Research Center (March 22, 2007), retrieved from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312.

Quinlan , et al., “ Getting the Public to Listen”; Pew Research Center, “Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes”; John Harwood, “America's Economic Mood: Gloomy,” The Wall Street Journal (August 2, 2007).

Stephen Ansolabehere , Jonathan Rodden , and James M. Snyder, Jr. , “Purple America” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20, no. 2 (Spring 2006 ): 97—118; Morris P. Fiorina with Samuel J. Abrams and Jeremy C. Pope , Culture War: The Myth of a Polarized America , 2nd ed. (New York: Pearson Longman, 2006).

“Bridge to Somewhere,” The Wall Street Journal (November 10, 2006).

Quinlan , et al. “ Getting the Public to Listen.”

An early November, 2006, CNN poll found that 54 percent of respondents said the government was trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses. Only 37 percent said they thought the government should do more to solve the county's problems. “Poll: Majority Believes Government Doing Too Much,” retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/27/poll.government/index.html. Another November 2006 poll taken for the Campaign for America's Future and Democracy Corps found that 52 percent of those surveyed favored “a limited government that keeps taxes low so that businesses and individuals can prosper,” while only 44 percent backed “a government that helps create conditions so than may can prosper, not just a few.” The same poll showed that 51 percent wanted representatives in Congress “who will support less taxes and less government spending,” while only 42 percent wanted representatives “who will work to cut health care and energy costs.” Robert Borosage , James Carville , and Stan Greenberg , “The Meltdown Election: Report on the 2006 Post-Election Surveys” (November 15, 2005), retrieved from http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/analyses/Democracy_Corps_November_15_2006_DC-CAF_Memo.pdf. Finally, a March 2007 Pew Research Center poll showed that 45 percent of Americans would rather have a smaller government providing fewer services, while 43 percent wanted a bigger government providing more services. Pew Research Center , “Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes”

Ruy Teixeira , “The Snapshot: Americans Understand Red Ink,” The Century Foundation (May 11, 2007), retrieved from http:www.tcf.org/print.asp?type=NC&publid=1575.

Stan Greenberg , James Carville , Ana Iparraguirre , and Jesse Contrario , “Health Care: Surging Economic Issue” Democracy Corps (October 3, 2007), retrieved from http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/analyses/Democracy_Corps_October_3_2007_Memo.pdf.

By a 52 percent—29 percent margin, according to a late September, 2007, ABC News/Washington Post poll, retrieved from PollingReport.com, http://www.pollingreport.com/budget.htm.

According to an early April 2007 Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll, Americans back paygo rules by a 51 percent—26 percent margin. Retrieved from National Journal Poll Track, http:www.nationaljournal.com.

An early May 2007 CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey found respondents similarly in favor of extending the tax cuts by a 57 percent—37 percent margin. Retrieved from PollingReport.com , http://www.pollingreport.com/budget.htm.

A USA Today/Gallup Poll taken shortly before the November 2006 election found that 74 percent of those surveyed disapproved of such a move. Donald Lambro , “Specter of Tax Man Haunts Democrats,” The Washington Times (November 1, 2006).

John Judis , “ Blue's Clues,” The New Republic (November 20, 2006).

Paul Abramowitz , “ Explaining Bush's Victory in 2004 (It's the Terrorism, Stupid!),” in Get This Party Started: How Progressives Can Fight Back and Win , ed. Matthew R. Kerbel ( Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006).

In the 2006 exit polls, 38 percent of voters identified themselves as Democrats, 36 percent as Republicans, and 26 percent as independents, while 21 percent described themselves as liberal, 32 percent as conservative, and 47 percent as moderate. In House voting, independents and moderates backed Democratic candidates by 57 percent—39 percent and 61percent—38 percent margins respectively, up from 50 percent—46 percent and 56 percent—43 percent Democratic leads in 2004. Bob Benenson , “Swing Voters Change Course” CQ Weekly (November 11, 2006).

On this last point, see Stephen Earl Bennett , “Another Look at Nonvoting's Implications for Democracy in America” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois, August 30—September 2, 2007.

See Lotke , et al., “The Progressive Majority.”

John B. Judis , “Abandoned Surgery: Business and the Failure of Health Reform,” The American Prospect (November 30, 2002), retrieved from http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=abandoned_surgery.

Jack Beatty , “The Insecure American,” The Atlantic (September 21, 2006), retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200609u/economic-risk.

As this article was going to press in mid-January 2008, congressional Democrats and presidential candidates alike were proposing targeted, temporary economic stimulus packages to try to head off or shorten a possible recession. Democratic presidential frontrunners Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, supported by leading economists, both suggested that since a stimulus program can only be effective if new public funding is injected into the economy, paygo budget rules should be waived to allow an increase in the federal deficit. But many congressional Democrats, although recognizing the political potency of voters' concerns about the weak economy, were also wary of abandoning their pledge of fiscal responsibility for fear of providing the Republicans with a tempting political target. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois nevertheless went beyond a stimulus program to call for a large-scale public investment plan to help the nation deal with globalization that would address health care, energy, savings, and education. But in light of many of his colleagues' continuing fiscal caution even in the face of a developing recession, I suspect that such a downturn will have to be both deep and long before a significant public investment plan like Emanuel's is likely to gain political traction. See Christian Bourge , “Democrats Seeking Broad Backing for Stimulus Package,” CongressDaily (January 14, 2008), retrieved from http://nationaljournal.com/about/congressdaily ; and Alexander Bolton , “Clinton, Obama vs. Pay-Go” The Hill (January 15, 2008), retrieved from http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/clinton-obama-vs.-pay-go-2008-01-15.html .