James K. Pollock

Doppler echocardiographic evaluation of right and left ventricular diastolic function in normal neonates

Doppler echocardiograms of the tricuspid and mitral valves were recorded along with the electrocardiogram and respiration in 22 normal full-term neonates. A computer-interfaced digitizer pad was utilized to measure the following: peak E and A velocities (cm/s); E and A areas (the components of the total velocity-time integral in the early passive period of ventricular filling [E] and the late active period of atrial emptying [A], respectively) and the 1/3 area fraction (or the proportion of filling in the first 1/3 of diastole). All of the variables of right (tricuspid) versus left (mitral) ventricular filling were significantly different on the 1st day of life. Respective values were peak E velocity (cm/s) 44.6 +/- 10.0 (tricuspid) versus 53.2 +/- 9.3 (mitral), p less than 0.01; peak E/A ratio 0.84 +/- 0.14 versus 1.15 +/- 0.17, p less than 0.0001; E/total area 0.58 +/- 0.07 versus 0.63 +/- 0.05, p less than 0.005; E/A area ratio 1.05 +/- 0.23 versus 1.63 +/- 0.40, p less than 0.0001; 1/3 area fraction 0.31 +/- 0.04 versus 0.41 +/- 0.04, p less than 0.0001; peak A velocity (cm/s) 53.0 +/- 8.4 versus 47.6 +/- 5.8, p less than 0.05 and A/total area 0.57 +/- 0.09 versus 0.41 +/- 0.09, p less than 0.001; the mean heart rate (beats/min) was not significantly different: 121 +/- 8 versus 120 +/- 7. Most of the variables remained significantly different on the 2nd day of life, but the level of significance was the same or less for all measurements.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The German Party System and the 1961 Federal Election.

Each German federal election since 1949 has resulted in a reduction in the number of parties securing representation in the Bundestag. While this trend continued in 1961, there is evidence that the party system is becoming stabilized, making it unlikely that any of the present parties will disappear in the near future. This article examines the 1961 election and its significance for the German party system. The major outlines of the present German party system became apparent as early as 1946, when party activities were resumed on a zonal basis. The principal parties then in the field were the Communist Party, the Social Democratic Party, the Christian Democratic Union, and the Free Democratic Party. The last two of these were known differently in different sections of West Germany, but today, with very few exceptions, the designation for each group is the same throughout the Federal Republic.

The Primacy of Politics.

In presenting my valedictory to this distinguished Association which has honored me by selecting me as its President, I should like to point out by way of introduction what has happened to this office, and therefore to me, during the past year. I have heard of one of my distinguished predecessors some twenty-five years ago who had little else to do as President of this Association than work all year on his presidential address. This was important work and I have no word of criticism of it. But the Association has changed, and today it leaves to the harried wearer of its presidential toga little time to reflect about the status of political science and his own impact, if any, upon it. An active Association life, now happily centered in our new Washington office, is enough to occupy the full time of your President, and universities as well as this Association might well take note. Therefore, in presenting my own reflections to you this evening in accordance with the custom of our Association, I do so without the benefit of the generous time and scholarly leisure which were the privileges of some of my distinguished predecessors. Nevertheless I do base my presidential address today upon my own active participation in the problems of government, as well as upon my scholarly experience. I have extracted it in part from the dynamics of pulsating political life. It has whatever authority I may possess after having been exposed these twenty-five years to the cross-fire of politics, domestic and foreign, as well as to the benign and corrective influences of eager students and charitable colleagues. This change in the nature of presidential addresses reflects, I believe, the new role of the political scientist and the development of our profession.

Campaign Funds in 1928

During the important political year 1928 no fewer than five separate congressional committees were engaged in investigating various phases of the problem of campaign funds. First, the Reed committee, which was appointed by resolution of the 69th Congress to investigate the elections of 1926, was continued in existence so that it could wind up its work. In addition, it was given authority by a new resolution of the 70th Congress to investigate the New Jersey senatorial primary of 1928. Second, the committee on privileges and elections of the Senate was authorized to hear and determine the Wilson-Vare election contest in Pennsylvania. A sub-committee, with Senator Waterman as chairman, was selected on January 27 to perform this task. Third, the Senate created a special committee to investigate pre-convention and election expenditures in the campaign of 1928. Senator Steiwer was appointed chairman of this committee. Fourth, a special House committee was appointed on the day before the close of the session to look into the campaign expenditures of 1928, with Congressman Lehlbach of New Jersey as chairman. Finally, the Senate by resolution authorized the committee on post offices and post roads, or any sub-committee thereof, to investigate the alleged sale of Southern postmasterships, and Senator Brookhart was appointed chairman of the sub-committee. The Reed committee held hearings in April and May in connection with the Wilson-Vare contest in Pennsylvania, and in June in connection with the New Jersey senatorial primary. These investigations did not lead to any particularly valuable disclosures, although they produced some interesting and enlightening information about the Vare machine.

The Constitution of Latvia

Following the lead of other recently created nations of Europe, Latvia has promulgated a constitution. This new republic came into the world of nations on November 18,1918, when it proclaimed its independence, although its government was not formally recognized by the United States until July 27, 1922. One year previous to this, on September 22, 1921, Latvia became a member of the League of Nations. After the independence of Latvia had been proclaimed, a constituent assembly was convened, and it was this body which drew up the new constitution. It was adopted February 15, 1922, and became law on June 30. Elections under the new organic law were held October 7 and 8, and the newly elected parliament met November 7 of the same year.

Discussions and Reviews : Lessons from Berlin: a review

Berlin is now and has been ever since the end of World War II the focal point in the Cold War with the Soviet Union. These three excellent books, approaching the problem from different angles, analyze and dissect its various aspects but all come to about the same conclusion-namely, that we should be very wary of Soviet offers of coexistence and that only military power has any effect on the Russians. These and other conclusions emerge from a review of Soviet-Allied relations over Berlin in the period since the end of the war. The book by the mayor of Berlin, Willy Brandt, is based on his Pollak lectures at Harvard in October 1962, &dquo;augmented by a third section concerning the German problem in the perspective of coexistence. This section was edited after the Cuban crisis.&dquo; Essentially, Mayor Brandt offers comments on many subjects in addition to coexistence, but his efforts at clarification of the term &dquo;coexistence&dquo; as used by the Soviets are not only perceptive but constitute the main thrust of this little book. &dquo;Coexistence,&dquo; he writes, &dquo;cannot be a synonym for maintenance of the status quo.&dquo; Nor can it be as defined by the Soviets. &dquo;Peaceful coexistence Soviet style means the militant pursuit of Soviet aims.&dquo; It does not imply mutual toleration. &dquo;Soviet coexistence is thus not coexistence in its proper meaningnot really peaceful but, on the contrary, militant....&dquo; &dquo;To this day Khrushchev and his followers still believe in total victory. It still determines their methods and is the major motivating force behind their policy.&dquo; Brandt is critical of Western negotiations with the Russians. &dquo;It seems to me,&dquo; he writes, &dquo;that during the past years the political practice of the West has frequently suffered from an insufficient ability to conduct realistic negotiations.&dquo; Certainly the record

LUDWIG DEHIO. Germany and World Poli tics in the Twentieth Century. Trans lated by Dieter Pevsner. Pp. 141. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1959.

Chancellor Betham ant. Erzberger in 1914, the latter quoted the Chancellor as follows : &dquo;How do you [Erzberger] manage to have so many bright ideas all the time. I never have any!&dquo; But aside from this insight into all the conflicting currents of German life, the book is also a vivid account of the rough and tumble of professional politics and particularly the personal power-politics waged in the Germany of that period. Against bitter internal opposition, Erzberger became a leader of the left-wing of the Zentrum (Catholic) party. He was an agitator, an organizer, and a pamphleteer and often his methods were Machiavellian.

4.00:

institutions are being dangerously undermined. Clearly, one of the primary cogs in the operation of democratic machinery is the electoral process. If elections are not properly conducted, if the voters are not enabled to control policy and to choose their representatives, and if neither control nor efficiency is achieved by the electoral process, then the whole democratic system is poisoned at the start, and popular government becomes a delusion.

Election or Appointment of Public Officials

The British Parliament has been passing through a period of pianissimo. Its praises should be sounded very softly, while its inadequacies and imperfections should be given wide attention. This does not imply a lack of veneration and respect for the Mother of Parliaments, but merely that a realistic approach should be made to the present-day value of this progenitor of the sturdy race of legislatures. No political institution is eternally successful, and even British institutions which have evolved so slowly, and in general so soundly, are no exceptions. The halo which surrounds Westminster is so great, however, that it almost blinds one to the imperfections which exist within those hallowed precincts. It seems almost sacrilegious, as a great British statesman recently observed, to attempt to meddle with “those great forms of procedure which have been handed down to us.” And yet when the Mother of Parliaments has so obviously deteriorated as to lose much of the respect and prestige which was formerly its possession, one seems justified in calling attention to its inadequacies. The fact is that in the last thirty years Parliament has gradually become an inefficient legislative body which does not effectively control the government, and which the people can hardly be said to control. As early as 1908, President Lowell wrote that “the House of Commons is finding more and more difficulty in passing any effective vote, except a vote of censure.” In 1931, it is doubtful whether even this can be done in a satisfactory way.

The Position of the British Parliament

Casting the largest popular vote yet recorded in any election in Germany, the German people elected on Sunday, September 14, 1930, the fifth Reichstag under the Weimar constitution. Using Article 48, the Bruning government had put into effect certain emergency measures which it considered necessary to alleviate the existing economic situation. But when called upon to pass upon these decrees, the Reichstag rejected them; whereupon the President, on the advice of the cabinet, dissolved the Reichstag and ordered new elections.The campaign occurred in a time of serious economic depression. Nearly three million unemployed persons were in receipt of government relief, either national or local. Taxes had been increased, salaries decreased, and there was widespread dissatisfaction. The government headed by Chancellor Bruning, from its inception a minority cabinet, appealed to the country to return to power with increased strength the parties which had given it support. On the other hand, the government was severely attacked by the Social Democrats for its use of Article 48; by the Nationalists because of its support of the Young Plan; by the Communists on general principles; and last, but not least, by the National Socialists led by Adolf Hitler, not on general principles, but without any principles at all! In many respects this election resembled the May election of 1924 more closely than the election of 1928.Not only was the election of critical importance to Germany and the world from an economic point of view, but it was also of great moment in the evolution of German political parties and democratic institutions in general.