AN EVALUATION OF FURTHER REFORMS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION PROCESS

By 1992, the party of the majority, the Democratic Party, will have been out of power for twenty years of a twenty-four year span. Since 1968, numerous reforms in the presidential nominating process have been considered and adopted by the Democrats. These reforms have had the effect of opening the nominating process to rank-and-file Democrats through state primaries and participatory caucuses. While the reforms achieve this purpose, the end result is a mixed system that has been described as a disjointed hodgepodge of rules.
This article presents ten criteria of a sound nomination system. Then a panel of researchers and practitioners weighs seven options for further reform against the ten criteria. Several policy options are considered by the panel as improvements over the current presidential nomination system.     

PRESIDENTIAL POLICY PREFERENCES AND SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENT SUCCESS

Presidential appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court are major constitutional events. Few studies assess whether this political process benefits presidents with appointment opportunities. This article estimates the policy success of presidents since Eisenhower in appointing favorable justices on the racial equality issues. Previous research uses the president's party affiliation as an indirect measure of presidential preferences. This research examines the president's policy stance more directly by using presidential public statements on racial equality issues. An issue specific measure of presidential preferences shows that presidents have been more successful in appointing like-minded justices than reliance on presidential party would suggest. Regression estimates of the justices aggregate voting record on racial equality cases are robust even in light of other controls. The implications for democratic theory and future research are discussed.     

THE IMAGE OF THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR: THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE PRESS*

The theme of this conference is "the image of the public administrator". This puts me immediately on the spot, since I suspect that many public servants believe that if that image is less flattering than they would like it to be, the fault lies largely with the press. This notion, which is also popular in the professions, is at once comforting and dangerous. It is comforting because it is always a relief to find that it is someone else's fault that one is unloved. It is dangerous because it encourages a retreat back into complacency.     

THE ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION*

The creation of an Australian Government Department of the Environment and Conservation represents, I believe, a major step at the national government level towards bringing a new dimension into the decision-making process. The significance of this step remains to be seen. It will depend on continuing acceptance by all levels of government of the need to have regard to environment and conservation matters in making decisions, and it is too soon yet to predict to what extent it will be accepted.