No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
American Political Development as a Problem-Driven Enterprise
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 July 2022
Abstract
We argue that American political development's (APD's) relentless preoccupation with the substantive problems that shape and animate American politics and how they emerge and develop over time has been a key source of the subfield's durability. We elaborate on three main payoffs to conceptualizing APD as a problem-driven enterprise: (1) it highlights APD's main comparative advantage within the American politics subfield, noting the tremendous agility APD's substantive breadth lends the enterprise; (2) it resolves the methodological debate, granting simply that the question chooses the method rather than the other way around; and (3) it reorients the critique: simply because a subfield considers itself to be problem-oriented does not mean that it is identifying the right problems to study.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
1 Studies in American Political Development, “Call for Short Articles Addressing the State of the Field” July 9, 2021, Twitter.com, https://twitter.com/StudiesAPD/status/1413572637834588164?s=20&t=X1jEss0mhgGH509WfJ8WCg.
2 Suzanne Mettler and Robert Lieberman, Four Threats: The Recurring Crises of American Democracy (New York: St. Martin's, 2020); Lieberman, Robert, Mettler, Suzanne, Pepinsky, Thomas B., Roberts, Kenneth M., and Valelly, Richard, “The Trump Presidency and American Democracy: A Historical and Comparative Analysis,” Perspectives on Politics 17, no. 2 (2019): 470–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
3 Stephen Skowronek, John A. Dearborn, and Desmond King, Phantoms of a Beleaguered Republic: The Deep State and The Unitary Executive (New York: Oxford University Press, 2021); Zachary Callan and Philip Rocco, eds., American Political Development and the Trump Presidency (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020).
4 Matthew J. Lacombe, Firepower: How the NRA Turned Gun Owners Into a Political Force (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2021).
5 Francis, Megan Ming, “The Strange Fruit of American Political Development,” Politics, Groups, and Identities 6, no. 1 (2018): 128–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thompson, Debra and Thurston, Chloe, “American Political Development in an Era of Black Lives Matter,” Politics, Groups, and Identities 6, no. 1 (2018): 116–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smith, Rogers and King, Desmond, “White Protectionism in America,” Perspectives on Politics 19, no. 2 (2021): 460–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kimberley Johnson, “Today's Election Denialism and Violence Has a Dark Echo in the Jim Crow South,” Washington Post, January 15, 2021, sec. Monkey Cage. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/15/todays-election-denialism-violence-has-dark-echo-jim-crow-south/.
6 Jacob S. Hacker, and Paul Pierson, Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer—and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2010).
7 Jacob S. Hacker, and Paul Pierson. Let Them Eat Tweets: How the Right Rules in an Age of Extreme Inequality (New York: Liveright, 2020); Theda Skocpol and Vanessa Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012).
8 Deondra Rose, Citizens by Degree: Higher Education Policy and the Changing Gender Dynamics of American Citizenship (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018); McDonagh, Eileen, “Political Citizenship and Democratization: The Gender Paradox,” American Political Science Review 96, no. 3 (2002): 535–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
9 Sam Rosenfeld, The Polarizers: Postwar Architects of Our Partisan Era (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018); Eric Schickler, Racial Realignment: The Transformation of American Liberalism, 1932–1965 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016); Keneshia N. Grant, The Great Migration and the Democratic Party: Black Voters and the Realignment of American Politics in the 20th Century (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2020).
10 Naomi Murakawa, The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014).
11 Hertel-Fernandez, Alexander, “Policy Feedback as Political Weapon: Conservative Advocacy and the Demobilization of the Public Sector Labor Movement,” Perspectives on Politics 16, no. 2 (June 2018): 364–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
12 Jessica Trounstine, Segregation by Design: Local Politics and Inequality in American Cities (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018).
13 Adam D. Sheingate, Building a Business of Politics: The Rise of Political Consulting and the Transformation of American Democracy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016).
14 David A. Bateman, Disenfranchising Democracy: Constructing the Electorate in the United States, the United Kingdom, and France (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018); Jesse Rhodes, Ballot Blocked: The Political Erosion of the Voting Rights Act (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2017).
15 Gerring, John, “APD from a Methodological Point of View,” Studies in American Political Development 17, no. 1 (2003): 82–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, The Search for American Political Development (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004); Kersh, Rogan, “Rethinking Periodization? APD and the Macro-History of the United States,” Polity 37, no. 4 (2005): 513–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pierson, Paul, “The Costs of Marginalization,” Comparative Political Studies 40, no. 2 (2007): 145–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sheingate, Adam, “Institutional Dynamics and American Political Development,” Annual Review of Political Science 17, no. 1 (2014): 461–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Daniel J. Galvin, “Qualitative Methods and American Political Development” in Oxford Handbook of American Political Development, ed. Richard Valelly, Suzanne Mettler, and Robert Lieberman (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), vol. 1; Galvin, Daniel, “Let's Not Conflate APD with Political History, and Other Reflections on ‘Causal Inference and American Political Development,’” Public Choice 185, no. 3–4 (2020): 485–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jenkins, Jeffery A., McCarty, Nolan, and Stewart, Charles, “Learning from Each Other: Causal Inference and American Political Development,” Public Choice 185, no. 3–4 (2020): 245–51Google Scholar.
16 Orren and Skowronek, The Search for American Political Development, 1.
17 Galvin, “Qualitative Methods and American Political Development.”
18 Jamila Michener, Fragmented Democracy: Medicaid, Federalism, and Unequal Politics (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018); Chloe N. Thurston, At the Boundaries of Homeownership: Credit, Discrimination, and the American State (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018); Michenor, Jamila, SoRelle, Mallory, and Thurston, Chloe, “From the Margins to the Center: A Bottom-Up Approach to Welfare State Scholarship,” Perspectives on Politics 20, no. 1 (2022): 154–69Google Scholar.
19 Jacob Grumbach, Laboratories against Democracy: How National Policies Transformed State Politics (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2022).
20 Soss, Joe and Weaver, Vesla, “Police Are Our Government: Politics, Political Science, and the Policing of Race–Class Subjugated Communities,” Annual Review of Political Science 20, no. 1 (2017): 565–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
21 Thurston, At the Boundaries of Homeownership; Michener, Fragmented Democracy; Daniel J. Galvin, “Alt-Labor's Turn Toward Politics and Public Policy to Combat the Exploitation of Low-Wage Workers: Building Power and ‘Punching Above Their Weight,’” Economic Policy Institute (Washington, DC, 2021); Daniel J. Galvin, “Alt-Labor: Low-Wage Workers and the New Politics of Workers’ Rights” (unpublished manuscript).