The Icelandic parliamentary election of 1987

In the election to the Althingi on 25 April 1987, the established party system in Iceland received its greatest blow so far. The four main parties between them managed only three-quarters of the valid votes, the Independence Party and the People's Alliance, both suffered their worst defeats ever. The new parties had a field day, as the Citizens' Party—the first major splinter group from the large Independence Party since its foundation—and the Women's Alliance received over 10 per cent of the votes each. Thus, the signs of crisis in the established party system—increasingly visible since around 1970—indicate an uncertain future for the four-party format in Icelandic politics.     

Turn-taking in mother-adolescent conversations about sexuality and conflict

The current study examined the nature and style of mother-adolescent conversations, how these conversations differ by subject matter, and dyadic and individual differences. Thirty-one mother-adolescent dyads (17 boys, 14 girls) with a child between the ages of 11 and 14 had a nonstructured conversation, and conversations about conflict and sexuality. They also completed questionnaires on beliefs about acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Conversations were measured for turn taking, total number of words, and conversational dominance, as well as nonverbal measures of affiliation, shame, and contempt. Conversations about sexuality involved less turn taking, fewer words, and more mother dominance than nonstructured conversations. Conversations about conflicts involved less turn taking but more words than nonstructured conversations. Some gender and age differences were found. More interactive conflict conversations contained higher levels of affiliation, and lower levels of child shame than conversations with fewer turns or higher mother dominance. In addition, children in more interactive dyads possessed a larger percentage of their mother's AIDS knowledge, and worried about AIDS a moderate amount.This research was supported by National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development Grant No. HD27035.Received M.A. from UCLA. Current research interests include parent-adolescent relationships, adolescent peer relations, and adolescent sexuality.Received Ph.D. from Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. Major research interest is in parent-adolescent communication and emotional development.Received Ph.D. from Boston University. Major research interest is in parent-child affective communication.     

The 1984 election as Anthony downs and Stanley Kelley might interpret it

This paper is an analysis of two rational choice theories of elections. Anthony Downs and Stanley Kelley's theories yield complementary interpretations of the 1984 U. S. election. Reagan's victory was based on both prospective and retrospective judgments as well as on candidate and policy considerations. Reagan won that element of an incumbent's reelection that is a referendum on his performance as president. However, people also voted on the basis of domestic and foreign policy preferences for the second term. On these issues voters preferred Mondale as much as Reagan. Reagan's victory owed remarkably little to his conservative agenda and to a warm regard for his personal qualities as a leader. His landslide was deceptive. The two Reagan victories were among the weakest of the six landslides of the postwar period by Kelley's test of decisiveness. The Reagan elections have not set the United States on the course of a long-term conservative agenda in either domestic or foreign affairs.     

Restraining the Governors: The Nordic Experience with Limiting the Strong State

The combination of a tradition of arbitrary royal government and popular intolerance, with the existence of extensive, unitary and highly centralized institutions of government, and with the dominance of government by a single, reformist party for more than a half century would seem a potent recipe for governmental abuse of individual and minority group rights. That is especially true in the absence of the formal constitutional safeguards used to preserve rights elsewhere Yet the Nordic democracies have in fact proved exemplary in protecting civil liberties Why? This article challenges the view that Nordic political societies are consensual historically or by nature, and it describes the limited traditional institutional checks on abuse of individual and minority rights by government Instead it finds the basis for the Nordic democracies' excellent record in civil liberties in the combination of (1) the development of new, non-traditional institutional checks on government. (2) the use of direct democracy as a check on parliamentary majorities. (3) the pervasive use of corporatist channels encompassing the major oppositional interest groups to draft and implement legislation, and (4) the effective constraints placed on decisions by parliamentary majorities by the pattern of fierce partisanship in the finely balanced parliamentary party constellation These protections for individual and minority liberties arise primarily from the assumption that basic conflicts of interest are a fact of political life and that they should be institutionalized.     

THE AMBITIONS OF POLICY DESIGN

There is no shortage of warnings concerning the hazards of excessive ambition in consciously-pursued public policy. In the light of these cautions, this paper considers the appropriate ambitions for policy design. The critics have missed the target. There is no need to fear ambition in policy design, provided that openness in communications about policy is secured.