Information,intelligence, enlightened public policy: Functions and organization of societal feedback

Normative properties which make social statistics useful as social indicators are illuminated by considering the functions systematic social knowledge has at various levels of social organization and the involvements of actors at these various levels in roles which result in such knowledge. Modes and degrees of generalization which make knowledge useful for action at the lowest levels of social organization (information) or for administration at intermediate bureaucratic levels (intelligence) are not necessarily applicable to the formation of broad social policy (policy knowledge) or for affecting the general conceptions of the social world held by broad public (enlightenment). The latter two functions are not always well served by data which have been collected and ordered by systems primarily responsive to the former two functions.Portions of this paper were presented at the 65th Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, New York City, 6 September 1969 and at a Colloquium on Urban Intelligence Systems at the Center for Urban Studies, Wayne State University, 17 April, 1969.     

Ideological cohesion between congress and the president: Does the road to the white house matter?

This study examines the impact of US presidential nomination politics on congressional‐executive relations. In particular, we pose the critical question of whether nomination reforms have had any systematic effect on the inter‐branch ideological gap. Using an indicator of liberal voting in Congress and a derived liberalism score for presidents, we analyse the ideological disparity between the branches over a 40‐year period from 1949 to 1993. Results do not support the view offered by Polsby and others that a shift toward more open and participatory decision making in the post‐reform nomination process has increased the probability that presidents will be ideologically distant from their fellow partisans in Congress. Indeed, the situation is quite the opposite, with post‐reform presidents being closer to the ideological centre of gravity of their parties in Congress than are presidents who reached the White House in the pre‐reform era.