This article assesses the validity of the statist approach in explaining U.S. import policy for steel in the mid-1980s. It focuses on a body of theoretical literature, exemplified in the works of Eric Nordlinger, Stephen Krasner, Theda Skocpol, and others, and evaluates the contention that policy formation can be best understood in terms of the state's autonomy from "politically weighty " social forces. It argues that despite some theoretical and methodological limitations, a statist approach offers a better explanation of policy development in this case than do society-centered models. State actors successfully resisted the disparate parochial demands of the steel industry, even though other countervailing societal pressures were weak. Of central significance was the fact that steel import policy had widespread political and economic implications that went well beyond the steel sector in both domestic and international affairs. The principal state actors felt compelled to locate steel policy within this broader context and to restrain the steel industry's actions accordingly. To do this, it was necessary for the state to maintain a substantial degree of autonomy from organized societal pressure.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Acs, Z. (1984). The changing structure of the U.S. economy: Lessons from the steel industry. New York: Praeger.
2.
American Iron and Steel Institute . (1982-1985). Annual statistical reports. Washington, DC: Author.
3.
American steel industry must consolidate, Baldrige says . (1984, April 2). Iron Age, p. 14.
4.
Barnett, D. , & Schorsch, L. (1983). Steel: Upheaval in a basic industry. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
5.
Bernstein, M. (1955). Regulating business by independent commission. Princton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
Block, F. (1980). Beyond relative autonomy: State managers as historical subjects. In R. Miliband & J. Saville (Eds.), The socialist register 1980 (pp. 227-242). London: Merlin.
7.
Borrus, M. (1983). The politics of competitive erosion in the U.S. steel industry. In J. Zysman & L. Tyson (Eds.), American industry in international competition (pp. 60-105). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
8.
Brock and Baldrige outline their opposition to steel trade measure . (1984, May). Iron Age, p. 15.
9.
Crandall, R. (1978). The roots of the current "crisis" in the U.S. steel industry: An international perspective. In H. R. Williams (Ed.), Free trade, fair trade, and protection: The case of steel (pp. 46-67). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
10.
Crandall, R. (1981). The U.S. steel industry in recurrent crisis. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
11.
Domhoff, G. (1983). Who rules America now?Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
12.
Elkin, S. (1985). Pluralism in its place: State and regime in liberal democracy. In R. Benjuamin & S. Elkin (Eds.), The democratic state (pp. 179-211). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
13.
Federal register. (1984, September 18). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
14.
Federal Elections Commission . (1984). Committee index of candidates supported/opposed 1981-82. Washington, DC: Author.
15.
Greenberg, E. (1989). The American political system: A radical approach (5th ed). Glenview, IL: Scott, Forsman.
16.
Hogan, W. (1983). World steel in the 1980s: A case of survival. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
17.
Hogan, W. (1984). Steel in the United States: Restructuring to compete. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
18.
Ikenberry, G. (1988). Market solutions for state problems: The international and domestic politics of American oil decontrol. International Organization, 42, 151-177.
19.
Jones, K. (1986). Politics vs. economics in world steel trade. London: Allen & Unwin.
20.
Keeling, B. (1982). The world steel industry: Structure and prospects in the 1980s. London: Economist Intelligence Unit.
21.
Krasner, S. (1978). Defending the national interest. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
Lake, D. (1988). The state and American trade strategy in the pre-hegemonic era. International Organization, 42, 33-58.
23.
Latham, E. (1956). The group basis of politics: Notes for a theory. In H. Eulau, S. J. Eldersveld, & M. Janowitz (Eds.), Political behavior: A reader in theory and research (pp. 232-245). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
24.
Lindblom, C. (1977). Politics and markets: The world's political-economic systems. New York: Basic Books.
25.
Lowi, T. (1979). The end of liberalism (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
26.
Mandel, E. (1969). The Marxist theory of the state. Beverly Hills, CA: Merit.
27.
McConnell, G. (1966). Private power and American democracy. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
28.
Miliband, R. (1973). The state in capitalist society. London: Quartet Books.
29.
Mills, C. (1956). The power elite. London: Oxford University Press.
30.
Nordlinger, E. (1981). On the autonomy of the democratic state. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31.
Nordlinger, E. (1987). Taking the state seriously. In M. Weiner & S. Huntington (Eds.), Understanding political development (pp. 353-389). Boston: Little, Brown.
32.
O'Connor, J. (1973). The fiscal crisis of the state. New York: St. Martin's.
33.
Offe, C. (1974). Structural problems of the capitalist state. German Political Studies, 1, 31-57.
34.
Offe, C. (1975). The theory of the capitalist state and the problem of policy formation. In L. Lindberg, R. Alford, C. Crouch, & C. Offe (Eds.), Stress and contradiction in modern capitalism (pp. 125-144). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
35.
Offe, C. (1984). Contradictions of the welfare state. Cambridge: MIT Press.
36.
Peters, B. (1977). Insiders and outsiders: The politics of pressure group influence on the bureaucracy. Administration & Society, 9, 191-218.
37.
Poulantzas, N. (1973). Political power and social classes. London: New Left Books.
38.
Przeworski, A. , & Wallerstein, M. (1982). The structure of class conflict in democratic capitalist societies. American Political Science Review, 76, 215-238.
39.
Skocpol, T. (1980). Political response to capitalist crisis: Neo-Marxist theories of the state and the case of the New Deal. Politics and Society, 10, 155-201.
40.
Skocpol, T. (1985). Bringing the state back in: Current research. In P. B. Evans, D. Rueschemeyer, & T. Skocpol (Eds.), Bringing the state back in (pp. 3-37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Stora, B. (1980). The world crisis in the steel industry: Outlook for Europe. Annals of Public and Co-operative Economy, 51, 375-392.
42.
Truman, D. (1951). The governmental process. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
43.
U.S. Congress . (1984a). Problems of the U.S. steel industry. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, 98th Congress, 2nd Session, April-August.
44.
U.S. Congress . (1984b). U.S. steel industry. Hearing before the Subcommittee on International Trade of the Committee on Finance, Senate, 98th Congress, 2nd Session, June 8.
45.
U.S. International Trade Commission , (1984). Carbon and certain alloy steel products (Investigation No. TA-201-51). Washington, DC: Author.
46.
U.S. International Trade Commission . (1988, January). Monthly reports on the status of the steel industry. Washington, DC: Author.
47.
U.S. International Trade Commission . (1989). The economic effects of significant U.S. import restraints: Phase 1. Manufacturing. Washington, DC: Author.
