Abstract

Abstract Conventional wisdom holds that local democracy is more responsive because it is closer to the people. Political science research suggests we should not be so optimistic. Scholars have long been studying American local governments, but, for a generation the field was relegated to the sidelines of political science. A new generation of scholars is bringing it back to the center, using an increasingly sophisticated set of research methods. Sarah Anzia has been a leader in this field rebirth, and her new book, Local Interests: Politics, Policy, and Interest Groups in U.S. City Governments, examines how local interests groups engage in local political decision-making, shaping electoral outcomes and policy. Her sharp, highly quantitative analysis identifies what factors make engagement and influence by local interest groups more likely. When read alongside classics in the literature as well as the new generation's emerging work, scholars and engaged practitioners alike can understand why the most optimistic views of local democratic action are unrealistic. Some of the same democratic shortcomings in representation and responsiveness that occur at the national level are also present in local politics. But the renewed interest in local analysis presents opportunities for scholars to learn from other fields and for local actors to build new organizations and institutions to increase the quality of local democracy in the United States. This essay assesses what is gained and lost in the quantitative rebirth of local politics analysis and how the field as a whole can continue to focus on the core issues of democracy, inequality, and public policy that will keep the field fresh and relevant.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call