---

    When I was researching my book The American Speakership two decades ago, I relied considerably on studies in American political development because they helped set the context within which Congress and the speakership evolved.  One such study was Stephen Skowronek’s The New American State.  Another was Morton Keller’s Affairs of State.  These studies helped me understand the political dynamic that drove the creation of the regulatory state in the late nineteenth century, and offered glimpses into Congress’s role in that process.  But with respect to the congressional role, they only whetted my appetite.  I wished then, and have wished since, that someone would come along and write the definitive account of how a Congress generally dominated by Republicans, serving with presidents who were for the most part also Republicans, managed to create a new and more robust set of state institutions. 
    Now comes the answer from, of all places Aberystwyth, Wales.  Robert Harrison has written an excellent book that surpasses in elegance and exactitude anything yet written on the Congress and progressivism during the Theodore Roosevelt administration.  He combines exacting historical research with a cluster analysis of voting patterns to create a compelling and interesting narrative historical account. The empirical focus is on three main issues: railroad regulation (the Hepburn Act), the “labor question,” and the District of Columbia.  These issues are set within a fulsome discussion of the political currents and institutional struggles that defined the period. 
    Harrison writes in a style that is both interesting and evocative of the period.  Not many American congressionalists today would describe the millionaires club as “ermine” or members of the House as “otiose.”  His care for detail extends to the size and sartorial taste of the members. 
    Harrison confirms that members of Congress were then, as they are now, pragmatists who were willing to compromise.  Speaker Cannon was willing to give TR his railroad regulation and meat inspections in order to preserve the Paine-Aldrich Tariff.  They also aimed to obtain or hang on to power, thus the fights over the rules of the House and the power of the Speaker.  The “majority of the majority” speakership we see today is not far distant from its earlier incarnations.
    This book is at its best in explaining the policy issues that defined cleavages between progressives and standpatters, and within each faction.  These issues are presented here in terms of the interests that drove them.  The one area in which I think this book might be improved is by a more thorough consideration of some of the policy issues at stake. For example, Harrison discusses the debate over the role of the courts that attended the Hepburn Act largely in terms of perceptions of the efficacy of the ICC in regulating the railroads.  That, of course, was central to the debate.  But underlying the development of the regulatory state, here, as elsewhere, was a larger debate over the respective roles of the legal and regulatory processes.  Harrison notes that a substantial plurality of House members were lawyers, albeit mediocre ones.  But the attitude of the legal bar toward regulation was infused by notions of the common law right of parties at interest to be represented by counsel in an adversarial process.  That process, as Harrison notes, had the potential to paralyze regulation; and perhaps this was a motive of some in supporting judicial appeals from regulatory judgments.  But for many, an appeal to the law was a matter of fundamental right.  This issue is still very much with us today, as witness the experience of the Environmental Protection Agency.  Under the reasonableness standard, the courts have become involved across the regulatory spectrum.  The seed of this ongoing debate was planted during the very debates that Harrison assays.  Thus policy, as well as interest, has shaped the lawmaking process.
    This book is a model that I hope will be emulated across other eras and issues in congressional development.  Doctoral students, take note!

---

Congress Reconsidered, 8th Edition, Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, CQ Press, ISBN 1568028598, $49.95, paper, 445 pages.

    The latest edition of this staple, like its predecessors, brings together in a topical array the work of an outstanding group of contributors to our understanding of the contemporary Congress.  The 8th edition is divided into five parts: Patterns and Dynamics of Congressional Change; Elections and Constituencies; Parties and Committees; Congress and Public Policy; and Congress and Political Change.  Each part offers three or four chapters relevant to the broad area. 
    Along the way, the book picks up issues that have been central to congressional change and our understanding of it over the past few congresses.   To take a few examples, chapters address the effects of Republican control (by Dodd and Oppenheimer themselves), the decline in party competitiveness (by Oppenheimer), the new dynamics of party government (by Steven Smith and Gerald Gamm), congressional leadership (separate chapters by Erick Schickler and Kathryn Pearson on the House, and by Lawrence Evans and Daniel Lipinksi on the Senate), and on the “new world” of the Senate (by Barbara Sinclair).
    The subject of congressional change has been a central concern of political scientists for the past generation of scholarship, and this book’s lineage has reflected that concern.  The editors have sought self-consciously for an explanation of change, and also to place the current rendition of Congress in historical perspective. Chapters by Dodd, David Mayhew, and Joseph Cooper further this objective. 
    For the most part, this edition of Congress Reconsidered retains the topical framework of previous editions, and many of its chapters are updates of previous renditions. The book’s title reflects the dilemma and the opportunity of its topic. Some might think that we know just about all that we need to know about Congress. Yet it is very difficult to keep pace with changes that political scientists would recognize as of great significance to the way Congress operates and the role that it plays in the political system. This is highlighted by Joshua Gordon’s chapter on “The (Dis)Integration of the House Appropriations Committee,” offered as a metaphor just at the moment when that committee seems to be disintegrated for real. 
    Congress is a complex institution and no book will be able to capture all of that complexity unless it is to be a very long book indeed.  Thus, we should not be surprised that the focus of this edition of Congress Reconsidered has both the advantage of topical and theoretical continuity with its earlier editions, and the disadvantage attendant thereto, the exclusion of some topics that now seem quite important. Thus, while many of the chapters in the book touch upon the relationship between the Congress and the executive branch, no chapter seeks to systematically assay that relationship.  We have now the first attempt by Republicans to operate a united government, and the relationship seems different in many ways than the way the government often operated under united Democratic control.  Interestingly, the 7th edition of the book contained six parts rather than the five offered here.  The deleted part addressed “Congress, the Executive, and Public Policy.” 
    But of course a single book cannot do all things, and this book does the things it does very well.  Both the editors and the contributors are to be congratulated and thanked for providing to us this valuable resource.

---

Expressive Politics: Issue Strategies of Congressional Challengers, Robert G. Boatright, Ohio State University Press, 2004, ISBN 0814209432, cloth, $44.95, 280 pages.

    Studies of campaigns and elections primarily focus on the winners of congressional races.  Empirical studies provide insight into many areas including how politicians win elections, the typical characteristics of those holding office, and how congressmen maintain office.  Despite this breadth of understanding, political scientists have paid scant attention to congressional challengers, particularly those who run in the ever-increasing category of “uncompetitive races.” 
    The purpose of Boatright’s study is to provide insight into how challengers run for office.  Specifically, how do challengers make strategic decisions about issue positions when developing their campaigns?  Arguing that standard rational choice and median voter theories are inadequate explanations of challenger behavior, Boatright proposes an alternative model in which challengers choose to run more or less “expressive campaigns” depending on their perceived chances of victory. Candidates use expressive campaigns in order to voice their ideological preferences without intentions of winning. 
    Under standard rational choice theory, rational behavior is geared toward vote maximization or winning elections.  With fewer and fewer competitive House races, these theories make the actions of many challengers appear “irrational.”  Why run for office if there is little or no chance of winning?  Furthermore, according to the median voter theory, candidates have incentives to develop centrist positions in order to maximize votes.  Again, irrationalities emerge in the case of congressional challengers as many of these candidates do not run centrist campaigns.
    Unlike the median voter theory, which assumes simultaneous issue positioning of candidates, Boatright’s expressive campaign model assumes sequential positioning.  In other words, challengers choose issue positions after incumbents have already staked theirs, thus changing their rational strategy.  If the incumbent has not adequately identified winning positions in the district, the challenger can assume positions anywhere within the winning zone.  However, if the incumbent has successfully positioned himself according to the median voter, the challenger can select any issue position along the liberal/conservative continuum without affecting the zero probability of winning.  The latter situation leaves two options for the rational challenger: voicing his own preferences or those of his party. 
    Boatright develops four propositions that must be true in order for the expressive campaign model to hold.  First, challengers and incumbents must have different strategies when developing their issue positions.  Second, challengers must know where the median voter is, the incumbent’s issue position, and their probability of winning.  Third, candidates that are not likely to win will adopt non-centrist positions due to their expressive value.  Finally, parties cannot drive position-taking. 
    In order to test his expressive campaign model, Boatright uses a variety of data from the 1996 and 2000 elections.  One of the strongest aspects of the book is the skillful combination of both quantitative and qualitative methodologies.  Through regression analysis as well as in-depth interviews with congressional challengers in 1996 and 2000 elections, Boatright provides evidence to support each of the model’s aforementioned propositions. 
    Expressive Politics provides a valuable contribution to the study of campaigns and elections.  The book is both theoretically and empirically provocative.  Boatright provides insight into the strategic behavior of congressional challengers and offers a model that potentially overcomes some of the weaknesses in standard rational choice and median voter models. 

---

The Future of American Democracy: A Former Congressman's Unconventional Analysis, Glen Browder, Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, 2002, ISBN 0761823077, paper, $41.00, 206 pages.

    Written from the unique combination of practitioner and academic, Glen Browder draws heavily on his experience as a public servant and observations to explore the “democratic distemper,” currently affecting the future of politics in America. Democratic distemper relates not only to the substance and character of public discourse and political action, but also to the systemic failures of the American system of government (8-10). Browder examines the causes of this democratic distemper, its effects and its dire future implications if left unchecked.
    Browder employs a systems model to examine his four propositions as the causal factors of democratic distemper. The first proposition asserts that the natural and open geographic, demographic, and political environments in which the American system operated were self-limiting. The shift from an open system of expansion into a contained system informs Browder’s concerns in the other three propositions and each of the successive propositions builds upon the next. Browder argues that public discourse is constrained by a “philosophical civil war” and democracy no longer functions in a traditional and acceptable fashion, resulting in the floundering of the “Great Experiment” of American democracy (61). The “Great Experiment” centers on the ability of government to provide the open, equal, and free society which democracy advocates and provides for.
    Browder approaches each of the causal factors individually, but his systems model requires that all the propositions be considered as simultaneously interacting to create the democratic distemper in American democracy. He considers the problems associated with democratic distemper, including the erosion and undermining of democracy itself. His question, “is America dying,” is not so much a question of fact, as a rhetorical question to prompt careful consideration of the current political and systematic atmosphere (46). Although Browder is not always clear on the exact problems facing the Great Experiment, he does indicate that the current system must be changed or transform if the progressive nature of American democracy is to remain intact and supreme. He concludes with an assessment of the future of American democracy within the context of democratic distemper, which yields a stark vision of federalism hearkening back to the American Confederation (185).
    Browder’s assessment of American democracy originates both through his many years of public service and academic study. He argues that although America is not currently dying, we are experiencing suffocation of some of the primary aspects and tenets of American democracy. The American system of democracy must be transformed to meet the challenges of tomorrow while recognizing the systematic and character of the current system.

---

Get Out the Vote! How to Increase Voter Turnout, Donald P. Green and Alan S. Gerber, Brookings Institution Press, 2004, ISBN 0815732694, paper, $14.95, 128 pages.

    Here Green and Gerber have produced a book written by political scientists for practical usage by those who work in politics.  As indicated by the title, this work focuses on get out the vote (GOTV) methods engaged in by candidates and campaigns and increasing voter turnout.  Indeed, this book is intended as a practical guide for campaigns and organizations to formulate cost effective strategies for mobilizing voters (2).  Green and Gerber posit that much of the current election literature emphasizes highly visible, federal elections while the typical election occurs on a much smaller scale (state and local) and at a more personal level.  This examination of GOTV techniques includes door-to-door canvassing, leafleting, direct mail, phone calls, and electronic mail.   
    Green and Gerber claim that what sets their work apart is five years of rigorous scientific research.  More to the point, they amass a large collection of evidence taken from randomized experimental design studies.  This type of research design provides high reliability, so a researcher can be sure of the findings.  The authors spend an entire chapter explaining the merits of randomized experimental studies.  For the topic at hand, they argue, this becomes crucially important because in campaigns and elections anecdotes prevail, meaning that practitioners continue to engage in certain GOTV efforts because they were told by another campaign staffer what might work in mobilizing voters, not because it is necessarily effective.  Green and Gerber, then, can go beyond the prevailing anecdotal wisdom to provide more systematic evidence of what works, when, and why.
    This guide is incredibly well organized and easy to read.  For each GOTV method considered, the authors both explain the studies conducted and assess the lessons gleaned from randomized experimental research so that even someone not well versed in research design issues can easily understand.  Moreover, they gauge the cost effectiveness of each technique (for a very concise and helpful chart, see Table 8-1) and offer general conclusions about its usefulness. 
    Green and Gerber’s general conclusion is that personal approaches are more effective in mobilizing voters than impersonal ones.  Mobilization, then, is far more than a simple reminder about Election Day, garnering the attention of voters, or supplying information about the campaign or candidate at hand.  These scholars say that motivation and belongingness drive citizens to vote and that the most successful mobilization efforts encourage these sentiments by making voters feel wanted at the polls (92). 

---

Greasing the Wheels: Using Pork Barrel Projects to Build Majority Coalitions in Congress, Diana Evans, Cambridge University Press, 2004, ISBN 0521836816, cloth, $60.00, 267 pages.

    Greasing the Wheels tackles the ubiquitously vilified and simultaneously appreciated unavoidable entity in politics, “pork.” Adding to other important studies and theories on the congressional collective action dilemma, distributive benefits, majority coalition building, and the definition and uses of pork, Evans’ thesis is that pork is used, not just to reward legislators for favorable votes as ends in themselves, but as a constructive tool by policy makers and party leaders to pass broad-based, not parochial, “general” interest legislation.
     Using a rich combination of qualitative research gathered from interviews on Capitol Hill and quantitative analysis of subsequent bills and congressional voting patterns, Evans builds a solid delineation of “pork” and its relatively recent embodiments and patterns. Of particular importance are her case studies utilizing the 1987 and 1991 highway bills, the presidential influence on passage of NAFTA, and the prevalence of pork seen in both branches of Congress and parties, particularly after the 1994 elections.
    Evans adds worthwhile notes and explanations on such issues as maneuvers legislators use to mask their earmarks, especially in the Senate with its formula based highway funding, the percentages distributive benefits were as part of overall highway bills, and biographical information on members’ views of pork and their actions once they became chair of a specific committee or leader in their party. While obvious in their necessity, these details add context that a less complete discussion of the subject matter or simple diatribe against pork would have not included.
    Greasing the Wheels is well-written, informative, detailed, and concise. Considering the current and recent congressional debates over the prescription drug vote, highway bill standoff, party ideologies and actual practices in relation to pork, and ten-year anniversary of the Republican ascension to power, this work, which includes analysis through the 106th Congress and interviews conducted as late as 2000, is still very timely. Evans’ comparison of the two parties and conclusions regarding the rise and future of pork make this an ideal read for those trying to understand or communicate how Congress does or does not, depending on one’s view of “pork,” do its work. As Evans points out, Congress often uses its most hated tool, pork barrel spending, to pass its most loved product, general interest legislation. This seemingly duplicitous irony is explained well in Greasing the Wheels.

---

Heavy Lifting: The Job of the American Legislature, Alan Rosenthal, CQ Press, 2004, ISBN 1568027346, paper, $34.95, 262 pages.

    In this book Alan Rosenthal offers a systematic account of legislative process and behavior among several American state legislatures.  The book’s premise is explicitly normative: Rosenthal wants to know what a “good” legislature is, and develops an argument toward that end.  At the same time, the book’s procedure is explicitly empirical.  In addition to drawing on press coverage, memoirs, and personal interviews, Rosenthal conducted a survey of legislators in five states: Maryland, Minnesota, Ohio, Vermont, and Washington.  These five states are taken to cover a range of state legislative experience and thus the results of the survey shed light on state legislatures more generally.
    The book’s organization is influenced by its normative concern.  A good legislature, in Rosenthal’s view, will serve three functions: “representing constituents and constituencies, lawmaking, and balancing the power of the executive” (ix).  How does the legislature perform these functions?  To address this question systematically, Rosenthal arrays eight chapters.  Two are addressed to the representative function, four to lawmaking, and two to the legislative-executive relationship.  An additional chapter assesses the variety and effects of legislative leadership. 
    A strength of this book lies in the interweaving of survey and anecdotal data, on the one hand, and a profound knowledge of the institutional rules and norms of the various legislatures, on the other hand.  Rosenthal does not merely describe state legislative experience; he enables the readers to experience it.  Is finding the funding an obstacle to lawmaking?  Of course.  How then, do state legislators reach compromise on sources of revenue to pay for the programs they want to enact?  Must leaders persuade members to support party positions? Obviously.  But where, when, and how do they do it?  What is the difference between an appeal made in private, in committee, in caucus, or on the floor?  Rosenthal takes us through the process and provides answers.
    What does Rosenthal conclude about the good legislature?  Among his three criteria the first, representing constituents, is the one upon which state legislatures generally do well.  If catering to the constituency were all that is required, all state legislatures would be five-star organizations.  Lawmaking offers a more mixed picture.  Various circumstances and pressures, including those from constituencies, complicate the lawmaking process.  Legislatures vary in their cultures, modes of organization, institutional rules, and partisan alignments.  In general, Rosenthal concludes, the most effective legislatures are those that can bring information and deliberation to bear on the lawmaking process.  Unfortunately, some legislatures do not do this as well as others.  It is in the effort to balance the power of the governor that legislatures are at their systematic weakest.  Governors have the advantage of unity, the bully pulpit, and extensive administrative capability.  A popular governor is hard to beat, difficult to balance. 
    I obtained my copy of this book just prior to departing for the annual meetings of the National Conference of State Legislatures in Salt Lake City last summer.  I was pleased to see that the book was prominently displayed in the conferences book exhibit area.  This comprised a 30x30 glassed cubicle in the lobby of the convention hall, leading me to wish that our lawmakers read more; but if they are not going to read much, I hope that they will read this book.  It is not heavy lifting.

---

The Last Hurrah? Soft Money and Issue Advocacy in the 2002 Congressional Elections, David B. Magleby and J. Quin Monson, editors, Brookings Institution, 2004, ISBN 081575437, $27.95, paper, 298 pages. 

    David B. Magleby and J. Quin Monson build upon previous scholarship regarding the impact of outside money in congressional elections. This text provides an insightful examination of the effect of outside money in the competitive congressional elections of 2002. The structure of this edited volume is useful to scholars and practitioners of American campaigns. In the initial chapter, Magleby places the 2002 congressional election cycle in its political and historical context.  He discusses the growth in outside money over time, and the potential impact of changes in the legal rules surrounding, and shifts in emphasis.  In this election, twenty-six races are considered competitive, and these races are the focus of the book.  For the case studies, the book utilizes the expertise of locally based academics in the competitive districts.  The data derived from case studies is utilized to determine trends in party money use, interest group electioneering, and the ground war.  Magleby completes the book by examining the effects of outside money in the tenor and content of congressional campaigns.
        Magleby and Nicole Carlisle Squires examine the use of party money in Chapter Two. Magleby and Squires show that party money continues to focus on candidates, and in aiding candidate-centered races.  As a result of soft money, the candidates and the state parties are more indebted to the national party.  Soft money provided by the national parties can increase the competitiveness of individual races, but does little to strengthen the state and local parties at the grassroots level.  The Democratic party has been most aided by soft money, as the Republican party continues to raise twice the funds in hard money.  This chapter particularly illuminates the role of soft money in terms of party unity and individual candidate control.
        Interest groups and issue advocacy is the topic of Chapter Three.  David B. Magleby and Jonathon W. Tanner examine the strategies of interest groups and the use of issue advocacy in competitive races. This analysis demonstrates the impact of interest groups on a campaign, and the continued movement away from candidate autonomy in determining the issues of his or her campaign. 
        J. Quin Monson examines GOTV operations and the ground war in the competitive congressional elections in 2002.  As former scholarship has indicated, the shift from the airwaves to the ground war is increasing.  Both the Republican party and its allies and the Democratic party and its allies relied heavily on the ground war to target key demographic and cultural groups.  The Republican allies devoted more money and time to this effort than they have in the past, and as a result, posted significant gains in key races.  Monson indicates that this strategy is effective and will likely continue to increase. 
        The following seven chapters track seven of the twenty-six competitive congressional races of 2002.  The authors examine the impact of interest group and party activity on the candidate-centered congressional races.  In the concluding chapter, David B. Magleby and J. Quin Monson utilize these analyses and address the significant impact of soft money in American congressional races, and its likely continuance. 
        As a whole, the authors found that soft money transforms candidate-centered elections. While party soft money does not appear to shift the focus away from candidates, interest groups create an agenda in competitive races that is broader and more pluralistic.  This book raises important questions about the effect of outside money on the electoral connection between members and constituents.    Of course, restrictions on soft money in the Campaign Finance Reform Act changed the landscape for the 2004 elections.  Readers may await these authors’ continuing analysis of the effects.

---

Passing the Buck: Congress, the Budget, and Deficits, Jasmine Farrier, The University Press of Kentucky, 2004, ISBN 0-8131-2335-6, 284 pages.
    Jasmine Farrier’s Passing the Buck chronicles a key aspect—budgeting—of the growing congressional delegation and abdication of power to the executive branch.  While congressional delegation and abdication, particularly in the area of war powers, has long been noted, Farrier’s research provides evidence that the problem extends into other congressional prerogatives as well.  Her research focuses notably upon the congressional power of the purse, and suggests that the phenomenon of budgetary delegation results not just from the rational actions of individual legislators, but from a larger systemic trend in institutional behavior.
    Farrier takes a primarily historical-institutional approach to exploring the development of congressional budgetary power.  A brief discussion of budgetary delegation is followed by chapters on recent reforms which Farrier suggests placed Congress on a downward spiral toward feelings of institutional impotence.  Major policy changes highlighted and analyzed in the discussion include the 1974 Budget Act, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act and the Line-Item Veto Act.
    Farrier recognizes a general departure since the 1970s from the institutional protection with which Congress traditionally (and appropriately) guarded its powers.  Particularly in the area of the budget, Farrier suggests that the political discourse of political campaigns and the policy results of Congress increasingly reflect a “rhetoric of institutional self-diagnosis” (6).  Whether revealed in candidate styles or in policies that increasingly delegate budgetary decisions to presidents and to the bureaucracy (the line-item veto for example), the congressional message to the public and to other governmental branches has been “stop us before we spend again” (5).
    On a number of levels, Farrier finds the congressional lack of budgetary self-confidence both unwarranted and institutionally damaging.  Although Congress receives the bulk of the blame for deficit spending, fingerprints belonging both to the president and to the public are found on insolvent budgets.  Presidents, primarily for reasons of institutional advantage, unduly escape budgetary criticism.  Paradoxical public opinion regarding taxation and federal spending also share responsibility for deficit spending.      Regardless of its causes, budget problems should not be addressed through delegating the power of the purse, Farrier argues.  Without the strong separation of powers provided by a prerogative of institutional protection, Farrier predicts curtailed deliberation along with weakened governmental accountability—clear problems to champions of republican government.  Farrier’s proposed solution, greater discipline on the part of members in the form of institutional self-confidence and public education (220-221), is unsatisfactory, unfortunately.  In addition to the general political opposition of institutional spending powers to member’s electoral interests, growing attitudes within the executive branch that “deficits don’t matter” make voluntary solutions to congressional delegation and abdication appear unrealistic.

---

---

Window on Congress: A Congressional Biography of Barber B. Conable, Jr., James S. Fleming, University of Rochester Press, 2004, ISBN 158046128X, cloth, $29.95, 429 pages.

    Thousands of members have served in Congress.  Only a few, however, have been the subject of in-depth biographies.  Of the biographies we do have, fewer still are noteworthy and contribute to a deeper understanding of Congress and those individuals who have served.  Fleming provides an outstanding biography of one of the most highly respected members of Congress.
    Barber Conable was a member of Congress from 1965 to 1985.  Window on Congress traces Conable’s life from his roots in western New York with insight on the environment that was to shape his public career: his family, education and military service.  It recounts his early efforts as a young lawyer, involvement in local civic affairs and Republican politics.  After a brief two-year stint as a State Senator, Conable was elected to Congress. The majority of the book describes his twenty-year career as a member of the Republican minority in the House.
    The book covers Conable’s election contests, his significant role on the powerful Ways and Means Committee, his support for Nixon and involvement in the Watergate investigation, efforts to save social security and cut taxes, and his decision, in 1984, not to seek re-election.  The concluding chapter outlines his activity after leaving Congress, including his service as president of The World Bank.
    Conable was unique in terms of his Congressional service.  He was respected on both sides of the aisle and, in fact, was selected in 1984 as the “most respected” member of Congress in either party.  The examination of Congressional service contained in this book is interesting for a number of reasons.  It includes examples of Conable’s regular newsletters to constituents and newspaper columns in which he analyzed the happenings in Congress and communicated his political philosophy to voters.
    The forward to the book was written by Richard Fenno.  This is very appropriate since Fenno used Conable in his own research and since Fleming uses a style of research very similar to that employed by Fenno.  The book draws on extensive private journals Conable kept throughout his career containing his thoughts, opinions, and emotions concerning Congress, politics, political actors, and events.  In addition, Fleming draws on over sixty hours of taped conversations with Conable to provide a biography rich in substance and style.  The result is a biography that enables the reader to gain valuable insight into Congress and the men and women who serve.

BACK TO TOP