United States Congressman Research Articles

Mr. Thorp goes to Washington.

On 2 April, I received an email that changed the course of the next 2 weeks. The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, chaired by United States Congressman Brad Wenstrup, invited me to testify along with my counterparts at Nature and The Lancet. The purpose of the public hearing (Academic Malpractice: Examining the Relationship Between Scientific Journals, the Government, and Peer Review) was to determine whether government officials, specifically former National Institutes of Health leaders Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, steered journals to publish papers suppressing the idea that COVID-19 may have arisen from a lab accident in Wuhan, China. I was not subpoenaed to appear but made the decision to testify voluntarily. My counterparts, who are based in the United Kingdom, decided not to attend.

The Lost Founding Father: John Quincy Adams and the Transformation of American Politics by William J. Cooper

Reviewed by: The Lost Founding Father: John Quincy Adams and the Transformation of American Politics by William J. Cooper Ben Wynne The Lost Founding Father: John Quincy Adams and the Transformation of American Politics. By William J. Cooper. (New York and London: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018. Pp. xvi, 526. Paper, $18.95, ISBN 978-1-63149-495-6.) In a departure from his consistently fine work on southern history, William J. Cooper has produced in The Lost Founding Father: John Quincy Adams and the Transformation of American Politics an outstanding biography of John Quincy Adams, the sixth president of the United States. The well-written tome is aptly named, giving readers a portrait of one of American history’s best-credentialed statesmen, whose story is sometimes diminished by the shadow of both the older founding leaders he followed and the wave of social and political change that ushered in the Jacksonian era. Cooper offers a balanced treatment of Adams’s life in the context of the turbulent times in which he lived. Cooper portrays Adams’s conduct against a backdrop of national growing pains, including the increasing “democratization of American politics for white men” and the relentless progress of slavery as the nation’s most divisive issue (p. xii). The strengths of this book are many. Adams was involved in all the important debates of his era, as James Monroe’s secretary of state, as president, and as a United States congressman after his term in the White House. Cooper does a wonderful job weaving Adams’s views into the historical fabric of the times and describing his relationships with powerful political contemporaries such as Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay, and John C. Calhoun. Of particular [End Page 896] interest are treatments of Adams’s work on the Adams-Onis Treaty with Spain and the Treaty of Ghent, which ended the War of 1812, along with Adams’s views of the Missouri Compromise as an ominous harbinger of things to come rather than an agreement that would help bring calm to the slavery debate. Adams was unique among American presidents in that, rather than retire from politics after his term as president, he continued to contribute significantly to public discourse through lengthy service in the U.S. House of Representatives. There he cast the South’s increasingly angry rhetoric promoting slavery and states’ rights as a “simmering brew of political evil” and became increasingly pessimistic regarding the immediate future of the country (p. 268). Guided by a firm belief in American exceptionalism before his presidency, he lived long enough to see the national fabric begin to unravel, dimming, in his view, the original vision of the Founders. In addition to chronicling major national events during turbulent times, this work also reminds readers of a towering political figure in America who has never quite achieved the historical status that he surely deserves. In many ways John Quincy Adams was indeed the last Founding Father—or “Founding Father by extension,” as Cooper puts it (p. 3). As John Adams’s son, he grew up in the household of a president and surrounded by leading members of the Revolutionary generation, men he looked up to and whose enlightened vision for the country he admired. Harvard-educated and well-traveled as a young man, there was probably no person better prepared to carry the Founders’ ideals into the next generation than John Quincy Adams. Yet he was unable to sustain his presidency for two terms against the swell of Jacksonian democracy that took the country in a new direction. Overall, Cooper’s work helps define Adams’s legacy and, one hopes, will give readers a chance to finally recognize this “lost Founding Father” and appreciate his contributions to his era. Anyone interested in antebellum American history, political history, or presidential biography would do well to add this book to their collection. Ben Wynne University of North Georgia Copyright © 2019 The Southern Historical Association

Not the Most Insignificant Justice: Reconsidering Justice Gabriel Duvall’s Slavery Law Opinions Favoring Liberty

Not the Most Insignificant Justice: Reconsidering Justice Gabriel Duvall’s Slavery Law Opinions Favoring Liberty ANDREW T. FEDE Joseph Story and Gabriel Duvall began their careers as Supreme Court Justices on the same day in February 1812, but the reputa­ tions of these nominees of President James Madison diverged widely. Story is ranked among the Court’s leading Justices. Duvall’s standing, in contrast, fell so far by the 1930s that Ernest Sutherland Bates, in his book The Story of the Supreme Court, labeled him “probably the most insignificant of all Supreme Courtjudges[.]” Bates implied that, at nearly sixty years of age, Duvall was too old when he was nominated to the Court; he thus devalued Duvall’s nearly twenty-four years as a Maryland lawyer, state courtjudge, and legislator; his two years as a United States Congressman; and his nine years as the first Comptroller of the United States Treasury. Bates also suggested that Duvall should have resigned from the Court soon after his appointment because “he became a few years later so deafthat he could not hear a word said in Court[.]”' Others based later critiques on the dearth of Duvall’s published Supreme Court output—fifteen opinions for the Court and one dissenting opinion—although they acknowledged that, during this era, Chief Justice John Marshall dominated the Court with his collegial approach to decision making and opinion writing.2 On the other hand, Irving Dilliard, who wrote the entry on Duvall in The Justices of the United States Supreme Court 1789-1969, accused Bates of making “a manifestly unfair judgment’’ about Duvall’s almost twenty-three-year career on the Court.3 Indeed, Duvall deserves further reevaluation, but not because of the recently revealed genetic link that he, President Barak Obama, and Vice President Richard Cheney have to Mareen Duvall, a mid-1600s Hugue­ not immigrant from France and an early 8 JOURNAL OF SUPREME COURT HISTORY Maryland slave owner.4 Instead, Duvall’s two slavery-law opinions favoring liberty when enslaved peoples’ freedom was at issue, reconsidered in their historical context, enhance Duvall’s place in Supreme Court history. Duvall’s only dissenting opinion, which he filed in Mima Queen v. Hepburn (1813),5 contradicted Marshall’s version of the hearsay rule, which Duvall believed would deny “reasonable protection” to “people of color.” And in Le Grand v. Darnall (1829),6 Duvall used the implied manumission doctrine to affirm ajudgment in an interracial diversity suit confirming that Nicholas Darnall was freed by his father and owner. These opinions by Duvall, who in 1783 owned at least eight slaves and whose 1844 estate included thirty-six slaves, stand in contrast to the anti-manumission and pro-slavery trend that swept through the antebellum Southern courts and legislatures, reaching the Supreme Court in Scott v. Sandford (1857).7 Duvall’s Freedom Suits and the Early Hearsay Rule Duvall’s experiences as a Maryland lawyer between 1778 and 1796, when he became a Maryland General Court judge, may have influenced his slavery lawjurispru­ dence. He was among the lawyers who represented enslaved claimants seeking freedom under the law. Other prominent Maryland lawyers who pursued these claims included Philip Barton Key; Philip’s nephew Francis Scott Key, writer of the lyrics to our national anthem; and Francis’s brother-inlaw , future Chief Justice Roger B. Taney. Maryland law, like the law in most slave societies, provided enslaved people with procedures to assert and establish that they were unlawfully held in bondage. The successful claimants generally advanced two primary theories of relief. Manumission suit claimants alleged that their masters freed them or one of their ancestors, and freedom suit claimants contended that they could not be enslaved under the applicable law.8 When the United States gained its independence, in most states only Africans or those with African female ancestors could lawfully be enslaved. Many Maryland freedom suits arose, however, because its legislature in 1664 adopted its first law intended to deter “freeborn English women” from marrying “Negro slaves.” This law enslaved “freeborn women” who married “any slave” for the term of their husbands’ lives. It also provided that the children of these marriages were to follow their fathers’ condition, except...

Sex-selective abortions: no simple solution

While American legislators contemplate criminalizing sex-selective abortion, experts say the experience of other nations which have tried to impose such a prohibition indicates that it is difficult to enforce and easy to skirt. Nevertheless, United States Congressman Trent Franks (Arizona -

“The Two Sons of Oil” and the Limits of American Religious Dissent

In the opening decades of the nineteenth century, Samuel Brown Wylie, an Irish-Presbyterian minister of a group of Scottish and Scots-Irish Presbyterians known as the Covenanters, and William Findley, a United States Congressman and also a descendant of the Covenanters, debated the Constitution's compatibility with Christianity and the proper bounds of religious uniformity in the newly founded Republic. Their respective views were diametrically opposed, yet each managed to borrow from different aspects of earlier political traditions held in common while also laying the groundwork for contrasting political positions which would more fully develop in the decades to come. And more than a few times their views seem to criss-cross, supporting contrary trajectories from what one might expect.Their narrative, in many ways strange, challenges certain “Christian” understandings of early America and the Constitution, yet it also poses a few problems for attempts at a coherent theory of secularity, natural law, and the common good in our own day.Samuel Brown Wylie is an obscure figure in American history. As a Covenanter, Wylie was forced to immigrate to America due to his involvement in the revolutionary United-Irishmen in Ulster. After finding it impossible to unite with other Presbyterians in Pennsylvania, Wylie became the first minister in the “Reformed Presbyterian Church of the United States,” which would also be called “the Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church.” According to his great-grandson, Wylie also went on to become the vice-Provost of the University of Pennsylvania.

Division I Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) Student-athlete perceptions on their NCAA postseason arrangement: A forced-choice certainty method survey approach

The Division I Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) within the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) continues to grow in popularity. However, the current system of selecting teams to play for the national championship remains a much-debated and controversial issue. The thoughts of university presidents, athletic directors, football coaches, and even United States congressmen regarding the current Bowl Championship Series (BCS) system are numerous and welldocumented. However, the opinion of the actual participating student-athlete is generally absent within the popular and scholarly discussion. The purpose of this study was to investigate the views of active Division I FBS student-athletes regarding the BCS and post-season play through a forced-choice certainty survey. Specifically, a forced-choice certainty method survey approach was used to explore both the directional and certainty judgment of 79 football student-athletes in order to compare points of interest (i.e., BCS v. Playoff Alternatives). Statistical results from the study showed participants questioned the fundamental fairness of the current BCS system and generally would prefer a playoff system because the current BCS system does not produce a ―true‖ champion in their opinion. Finally, this study importantly offers a serious attempt to begin collecting information on this topic from an understudied group important in college football. 1 Seifried and Turner: FBS Student-athlete perspective Published by Digital Commons @ Kent State University Libraries, 2016

Susan D. Jones, Death in a Small Package: A Short History of Anthrax

A few weeks after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon a series of letters containing an innocuous looking beige-coloured powder arrived at the offices of United States Congressman Tom Daschle. Containing spores of Bacillus anthracis that had been weaponised so as to float freely in the air, the letters would result in 22 people, including four US postal workers, contracting anthrax, a deadly disease that in previous centuries had been the preserve of Turkish sheep farmers and Yorkshire wool sorters. The identity of the person who sent those spores may never be known for certain—the FBI's lead suspect, US anthrax vaccine researcher Bruce Ivins, committed suicide shortly after being indicted in 2008, meaning the evidence against Ivins was never tested in court—but thanks to the latest genomic techniques we know that the mother culture from which the spores were generated came from a flask in Ivins' office.

"This Spreading Radicalism": Hamlin Garland's A Spoil of Office and the Creation of True Populism

A Spoil of Office (1892), Hamlin Garland's most sustained Populist novel, captures as no other work of American fiction does tremendous growth and difficulties of post Civil War agrarian uprisings in West. Set in years 1877 to late 1884, describes crest and decline of Grange movement and beginnings of Farmers' Alliance, parent of Populist Party. The difficult path toward Populism is embodied in protagonist, Bradley Talcott, who develops from an ignorant lowa farmhand into United States Congressman and Alliance supporter; other main character, Ida Wilbur, embodies similar development from young and somewhat naive Grange lecturer into an impassioned feminist and Alliance organizer. By end of novel, Bradley and Ida--like agrarian West they live in, are dedicated to, and symbolize--are transformed: they have become Populists.(1) Despite novel's importance, though, remains virtually forgotten and uniformly misread. The most recent study of book, by Eberhard Alsen, is nearly 30 years old and shows little interest in dominant subject matter of novel, namely political uprising in West. Alsen, with an avowedly and insistently political novel in front of him, avoids any discussion of politics. Indeed, he claims that novel is not really political at all, but rather one about courtship and development (rise) of protagonist. The agrarian uprising only serves as historical background; what is most interesting about book is how it illustrates Garland's development as writer, as shown by Garland's revision of in 1897, five years after was originally published.(2) The many cuts in this later edition, especially at end of book, reveal writer who, in Alsen's view, is wisely moving away from issues of and economic injustices to more general and humanitarian concern for physical suffering that farmers of that time had to endure. To Alsen's way of thinking, shift from specifics of mere economic injustice to general humanitarian themes marks an important aesthetic advance, and renders 1897 edition superior to original version.(3) This essay argues that exact opposite is true, that 1892 version is clearly superior: Garland's pruning of Ida's political speeches and his other cuts and changes de-politicize and de-radicalize text; fundamentally political novel is shorn of much of its essential politics. By 1897, Garland had accepted notion, one that would affect his fictional practice for following two decades, that politics necessarily weakens one's art. As he later wrote of Spoil, the controversial side of my book killed it. I included too many political arguments.(4) The same belief that politics and art are contradictory has dominated criticism of Spoil and of Garland' s work in general. Even Garland's best critics have proven unable to perceive most elementary issues and virtues of Spoil. Donald Pizer, for example, claims that despite excellence of A Spoil of Office as contemporary social history, is undoubtedly failure as novel.(5) V.L. Parrington, writing in late 1920s, surprisingly makes same art-versus-politics distinction, calling Spoil a social tract rather than work of art.(6) Edward Wagenknecht, following suit, claims that Spoil is forward-looking sociologically but undistinguished as fiction.(7) Garland himself repudiated novel as nothing more than a partisan plea for stertorous People's Party and refused to reprint in 1922 Border edition of his works.(8) To be sure, Spoil is far from perfect. Perhaps most grievous drawback is that in this frankly political novel, politics, even in 1892 edition, are oftentimes poorly explained. The scenes set in political capitals of Des Moines and Washington, D.C., for example, contain some quotable speeches on political corruption, but never go much beyond that. …

Two Burmese doctors held for political crimes

Amnesty International is campaigning on behalf of two doctors imprisoned in Yangon, capital of former Burma. Ma Thida, 27, and Aung Khin Sint, 59, were sentenced last year to 20 years each in prison for crimes against the ruling military government. Dr Thida, who is held in solitary confinement, and Dr Aung Khin Sint, who has been subjected to periods of forced labour, are being held in Insein prison, renowned for its harsh conditions. In February, United States congressman William Richardson visited Dr Thida, and she told him that she was …

Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia: A Biography (review)

348CIVIL WAR HISTORY Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia: A Biography. By Thomas E. Schott. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1988. Pp. xx, 552. $37.50.) An important and long-standing gap in Southern history is now filled by this comprehensive and critical biography of Alexander H. Stephens. Thomas Schott, chief of the office ofhistory at TinkerAir Force Base in Oklahoma, not only has done his research covering a long period in a first rate manner, but he writes well and with a nice mixture of sympathy for and detachment from his subject. If there weresuch a study available about Jefferson Davis, Southern and especially Confederate history would be fortunate indeed. Born frail and sickly, as he remained all his life, Stephens was the son of a yeoman farmer who was also a stern school teacher. Schott speculates in an enlightening but restrained fashion about the fact that the mother of "Little Aleck" died when he was only a few months old, and he had a cool, unhappy relationship with his stepmother. Never marrying , he was passionate only about politics and his beloved, younger half brother, Linton. Through the aid of generous patrons who recognized his great seriousness and abilities, Stephens attended a classical academy in Washington, Georgia, and then Franklin College (later the University of Georgia) in Athens. Graduating first in his class at age twenty in 1832, he hungered for recognition—which he soon found by reading law and then entering into a successful practice and an apprenticeship in the Georgia legislature. Though Stephens's role as a United States congressman and leading Georgia Whig in the 1840s and 1850s is meticulously charted, that portion of the study is perhaps not as important as the section dealing with the secession crisis, the formation of the Confederacy, and the war years. Loving order and the Constitution (as he understood it) above all, Stephens and his conservative Unionist allies in Georgia are portrayed as thoroughly cowed and disorganized during the secession crisis, with Stephens finally allowing the despair with which he always flirted to conquer him. Yet he soon played a key role in drafting the Confederate constitution and became vice-president partly because he lost the scattered support he had for the presidency, according to Schott's account, when he "refused to commit himself to striking the first blow against the Union" (p. 328). Thus a self-righteous vice-presidentbecame linked to an equally selfrighteous president, and Schott blames Davis about as much as Stephens for the rift that eventually developed between them. While mentioning at several points Stephens's profound belief in the innate inferiority of blacks, Schott does not harp on the obvious and only mentions Stephens 's famed "cornerstone speech" at Savannah in March 1861, in a brief yet illuminating section. BOOK REVIEWS349 Stephens, in openly opposing certain policies of the Richmond government after 1862, is portrayed as a true lover of liberty (for whites) who "did not harbor a traitor's heart" (p. 367). Schott concedes that Davis understood the nature of the Civil War far better than did Stephens, but faults the president for believing that Southern hearts could be won for the cause "by increasingly burdensome laws ever more capriciously executed" (p. 396), and for the foolishness of treating the politically influential Stephens like a cipher. Yet in the last analysis, Schott argues that Stephens put himself in an indefensible position by 1864: "Somehow in his excursions through the ethereal realms of truth Stephens had failed to understand what a shambles war always makes of morality, what an unreasoning activity it is, and what a pitiful weapon philosophy is to oppose the minions of Mars" (p. 414). Still hungry for vindication through political recognition and office after the war, Stephens eventually served again in the House of Representatives and finally, at the time ofhis death in 1882, as a governor ofhis state—one who was by then addled by alcohol and morphine. One might wish for some final conclusions concerning the long, important career of this strangely fascinating man, but they have to be found in the author's preface and scattered throughout the volume. "He was always trying to prove his manhood...

Farewell to foreign Aid

“Foreign aid has a great future—behind it,” observed a United States congressman in the late 1960s. The words were prophetic. Since then the aid program has encountered growing opposition; it has steadily dwindled in size, especially in real terms; and worst of all, it has become more than ever an odd amalgam of contradictory objectives. Meanwhile, what had been its sole purpose—to help build the nascent economies of the poor nations on sound foundations—has receded into the background. Today that purpose is almost foreign to foreign aid.This, at least in hindsight, is not too surprising. Foreign aid was born of mixed parents, a hybrid; and as time went by it was further hybridized as it was impregnated by ever more extraneous elements.

Candidate Visibility in France and the United States

Survey data indicate that French legislative candidates are more visible than United States congressional candidates to the electorates in their districts. However, candidate visiblity in the United States appears to be greater in a presidential election year than in off-years. It is greatly affected, also apparently only in presidential years, by the simultaneous presence of senatorial and/or gubernatorial candidates, who tend to eclipse the congressional candidates. When one controls for such institutional factors as the eclipsing phenomenon in the United States and the French multiparty system, levels of candidate visibility in the two countries tend to converge. French deputies' perceptions of the relative importance of their personal reputations and party affiliations in winning them votes appear to be better justified empirically than the corresponding perceptions of United States congressmen. However, French deputies do not behave in the Assembly consistently with their comparatively accurate perceptions, while United States congressmen tend to act in conformity with their less well founded perceptions.

Managing Congressional Papers: A Repository View

Walter Judd had a grievance. Judd was the United States congressman from suburban Minneapolis and vicinity from 1942 to 1962. During these twenty years, he had experienced a distressing change in the nature of his public service. By the end of his term, his major duties seemed to him no longer to be those of a lawmaker with a substantive role in formulating and structuring national policy. Instead he found constituent requests, services, and liaisons commanding 80-85 percent of his time and energy; and he felt that this change had come about because ordinary citizens had no recourse to the federal government except through their congressman. His defeat for re-election in 1962 followed an aborted announcement of retirement earlier that year, which had been prompted by his distaste and disappointment at what he obviously considered a comedown from lawmaker to lackey.1 Judd's papers reflect this transformation. Constituent service materials approximately doubled in quantity during his second decade in office, with the greatest increases occurring for such matters as assistance to military personnel, social security cases, and passports and visas.2 A similar pattern appears in the papers of most of Judd's contemporaries and successors. More than a third of the papers (1947-58) of Senator Edward J. Thye concern his interactions with federal agencies and congressional committees in behalf of his constituents. In 1948, similar letters begin to appear in abundance in Harold C. Hagen's papers (1943-54). Constituent files for legislative issues, executive departments, casework, and general constituent relations comprise half or more of the papers of representatives Joseph E. Karth, Ancher Nelsen, and Clark MacGregor, all of whom served during the 1960s.3 In the early 1950s, as the nature of the documented functions of members of Congress was shifting, the bulk of their papers began to mount in what an enterprising cataloger several years ago memorialized as a crescendo of volume.4

One small step for functionalism: UN participation and Congressional attitude change

As an explanation of organizational growth at the international level, functionalism postulates that people who become personally involved in the activities of international agencies will develop attitudes more favorable to international cooperation. Analysis of speeches by United States Congressmen and Senators before and after serving as delegates to the UN General Assembly indicates that significant attitudinal change may occur. At the cognitive level, Congressmen tend to pay more attention to the UN than before. The majority also experience positive change in affect toward the UN. In addition, the data provide evidence of convergence toward a mean value as participants initially holding the more extreme views (positive or negative) generally express more moderate opinions as a result of the UN experience. The fact that such a leveling of expectations occurs at a significantly higher level of favorability gives modest support to the functionalist thesis.

The effect of interparliamentary meetings on the foreign policy attitudes of United States Congressmen

The major hypothesis of this article is that attendance at interparliamentary group meetings by members of Congress between 1949 and 1970 modified their attitudes toward foreign policy. Interviews with a sample of congressional delegates, analysis of roll call data, and documentary records were used to test this hypothesis. Changes after attendance at an initial meeting were small. However, when party, ideology, and degree of previous isolationism or internationalism were controlled the changes were much more significant. Predictions formulated on the basis of cognitive dissonance theory were remarkably accurate, thus suggesting that cognitive consistency explanations may help to account for the behavior observed.

Some Highlights in Plant Pathology in the United States

As this chapter is published, 122 years have elapsed since De Bary (12), at the age of 22, published his epochal paper in Berlin, in which he refuted the age-old theory that fungi parasitic on plants were not distinct organisms, but resulted from tissue breakdown of what we now call the host plant due to adverse environment or malnutrition. Good evidence of this modern viewpoint had already been presented in France by Prevost (45), who published results of his study of wheat bunt in 1 807. His views were ignored by Re (46) in Italy in 1817, and by Unger (69) in Austria in 1 833. Berkeley (6) in England had inclined to the same point of view as De Bary in writing on potato late blight in 1848. Tulasne (68) in France in 1 853 was also in accord in his description of the powdery mildew fungus on grape .. Final proofs of our modern point of view came slowly but steadily during the next few decades. Midway in this 1 22-year period, I began my graduate studies in plant pathology in 1 91 4 under Professor L. R. Jones at the University of Wisconsin. He laid much stress in his lectures upon the importance of the historical background of modern plant pathology, as did Professor H. H. Whetzel at Cornell University. In fact, we had a semester seminar on the subject nearly every other year. I mention this for the benefit of beginners in this science who may take time to read this chapter, since it may appear to them to place too much emphasis on old stuff. Six years after De Bary's paper, a former United States Congressman from Illinois spoke before the Wisconsin Agricultural Society at the Milwaukee, Wisconsin State Fair. He put together some very profound facts in these two sentences: Every blade of grass is a study; and to produce two where there was but one is both a profit and a pleasure. And not grass alone, but soils, seeds and seasons; hedges, ditches and fences; draining, droughts and irrigations; plowing, hoeing and harrowing; reaping, mowing and threshing; . . . saving crops, pests of crops; diseases of crops, and what will prevent or cure them; .. . the thousands of things of which these are specimens, each a world of study within itself.

Process Satisfaction and Policy Approval in State Department-Congressional Relations

Satisfaction with information parts of policy-making appears to correlate with satisfaction with policy. Among United States congressmen, those who are satisfied with the information furnished them by the Department of State and the weight given to congressional opinion in departmental policy-making are also likely to approve departmental policy. This findig, however, applies primarily to congressmen of the political party opposite the party which controls the executive. Thus, a Republican executive may facilitate Democratic congressmen's support of bipartisanship by satisfying the congressmen's needs for information and by involving them in policy-making.