Roger W. Cobb

Agenda Building as a Comparative Political Process

Agenda building is the process through which demands of various groups in a population are translated into issues which vie for the attention of decision makers (formal agenda) and/or the public (public agenda). This paper presents three models for the comparative study of agenda building. The outside initiative model describes groups with minimal prior access to decision makers, who must consequently first expand their issues to a public agenda before they can hope to reach the formal agenda. The mobilization model accounts for issues which are placed on the formal agenda by political leaders, who subsequently attempt to expand these issues to the public agenda to obtain the support required for implementation. The inside access model refers to leaders, or to those having close contact with these leaders, who seek to place issues on the formal agenda directly, and for whom expansion to the public agenda is both unnecessary and undesirable. Propositions are stated about intergroup variation in patterns of agenda building within societies; about variations in success rates for different strategies and probabilities of occurrence for the three models in different types of societies; and about characteristics of the agenda-building process which hold in all three models and in any social setting.

The Politics of Agenda-Building: An Alternative Perspective for Modern Democratic Theory

The fall of the Weimar Republic and the rise of Nazi and fascist movements in the first half of the twentieth century sent out tremors that were to shake the very foundations of democratic thought. As a simple act of faith, democratic theorists had assumed that the common man had both the right and the ability to participate in his own governance. If given the opportunity, the overwhelming majority of people in any polity would presumedly be reasonable, relatively rational, and responsible political actors. Hitlers rise to political power in a constitutional system that had been scrupulously constructed to be a showpiece of democracy, coupled with the historically unparalleled rise of mass movements hroughout the world, called this traditional democratic faith and trust in the common man seriously into question.

ARE ELDERLY DRIVERS A ROAD HAZARD? PROBLEM DEFINITION AND POLITICAL IMPACT

Abstract Elderly drivers are increasing in number and some statistics show they are more likely to be involved in fatal accidents than all other age groups but those under 25. States have attempted to address the problem in various ways, but very few have required mandatory retesting at license renewal for those beyond a particular age. Why have so few states chosen to act? The key is how the issue is framed for the public and decision makers. Several phases of problem definition are explored to explain the political dynamics of the older driver issue: incidence, causality, severity, crisis labeling, problem population characteristics, and linkage of values to the issue and solutions. Based upon this analysis, it is not surprising that elder interest groups have been successful in containing policy initiatives designed to restrict elderly driving.

How will we get there from here? Placing transportation on the aging policy agenda

Roger W. Cobb is Professor of Political Science at Brown University. Joseph F. Coughlin is Director of the New England University Transportation Center at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Roger Cobb can be contacted care of the Department of Political Science, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912 (E-mail: roger-cobb@brown.edu). Joseph Coughlin can be contacted care of the Age Lab,Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77Massachusetts Avenue, Room 1-235, Cambridge, MA 02139 (E-mail: coughlin@mit.edu).

Symbolic Identifications and Political Behavior

The processes through which individual preferences and concerns are aggregated and given collective expression are among the most critical and the most perplexing in the political process. A variety of possible explanations have been offered that speak to the problem, but none is fully satisfactory. Perhaps the most common explanation is represented by the so-called &dquo;group approach&dquo; to politics. Here groups, variously defined as organizations or collections of people having certain attributes in common, are seen as the primary vehicle through which interests are aggregated and articulated.’ It is generally recognized, however, that this solution largely begs the question of the common motivational bases for behavior by simply assuming that such exists.’ Moreover, the group approach either dismisses or ignores the political relevance of the vast majority of citizens who are neither actively involved in the group process nor inclined to view groups as their linkage to the

WHEN IS A SOLUTION POLITICALLY FEASIBLE? MAGLEV RAIL AND INTERCITY TRAFFIC CONGESTION

More and more people are using planes, trains, and automobiles. Traffic congestion plagues both highways and airports, making travel between cities more problematic with the passage of time. Gridlock and winglock are becoming part of American life. High-tech solutions to congestion exist. One is the maglev train, which can reach speeds of up to 300 mph (486 kph). This article examines 2 periods in the last 30 years in which maglev was considered as a possible solution to transportation congestion. However, in both instances, the coupling was not made between problem and solution. It is argued that although technicalfeasibility and economics are crucial, a successful solution requires three political elements: affordability, acceptability, and accessibility. The failure of maglev is explained in terms of the requisite components of a successful solution.