Conventional accounts of the U.S. constitution laud its checks and balances for diffusing power across many venues, limiting the potential for government oppression, and protecting political minorities. I refer to this as constitutional folk wisdom and contrast it with an American political economy approach of veto exceptionalism to better understand how the U.S. constitution shapes, and is shaped, by power relations. This analysis illustrates the volume and scope of veto exceptionalism and its implication for democratic participation and accountability, contrasts it with the virtues championed by the folk wisdom, and suggests how veto exceptionalism can help explain political outcomes and processes in American politics. I argue that the folk wisdom is not only inaccurate as a description of how power functions in the American “checks and balances” system; it is cultivated and utilized most frequently by powerful economic and racial actors that benefit from the anti-democratic and elitist features of the U.S. constitutional system.
AchenChristopher H.BartelsLarry M.. 2017. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
2.
AnsolabehereStephenMaxwellPalmerSchneerBenjamin. 2018. Divided Government and Significant Legislation: A History of Congress from 1789-2010. Social Science History; 42(1): 81–108.
3.
BartelsLarry M.2016. Unequal Democracy. Princeton, , NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
BatemanDavid A.KatznelsonIraLapinskiJohn S.. 2018. Southern Nation: Congress and White Supremacy After Reconstruction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
5.
BaumgartnerFrank R.BerryJeffreyHojnackiMarie M.LeechBethKimballDavid. 2009. Lobbying and policy change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6.
BinderSarah A.2004. Stalemate: Causes and Consequences of Legislative Gridlock. Brookings Institution Press.
7.
BlumenthalDavidMoroneJames. 2010. The Heart of Power: Health and Politics in The Oval Office. Berkeley, CA: Univ of California Press.
8.
BroockmanDavid E.Skovron.Christopher2018. “Bias in Perceptions of Public Opinion Among Political Elites.” American Political Science Review112 (3): 542-563.
9.
CampbellAndrea Louise. 2010. “The Public’s Role In Winner-Take-All Politics.” Politics & Society38 (2): 227-232.
10.
ColbernAllanKarthick RamakrishnanS.. 2020. Citizenship Reimagined: A new Framework for State Rights in the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11.
CronkLeeLeechBeth L.. 2012. Meeting at Grand Central. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
12.
CurryJames M.LeeFrances. 2020. The Limits of Party: Congress and Lawmaking in a Polarized Era. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
DahlRobert A.2003. How Democratic is the American Constitution?New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
14.
DawsonMichael C.FrancisMegan Ming. 2016. “Black Politics and the Neoliberal Racial Order.” Public Culture28 (1): 23-62.
15.
FeeleyMalcolmRubinEdwin. 2008. Federalism: Political Identity and Tragic Compromise. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
16.
FilindraAlexandraKaplanNoah J.. 2016. “Racial Resentment and Whites’ Gun Policy Preferences in Contemporary America.” Political behavior38: 255-275.
17.
FishkinJosephForbathWilliam E.. 2022. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
18.
FrancisMegan Ming. 2014. Civil rights and The Making of the Modern American State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19.
GilensMartin. 2009. Why Americans Hate Welfare. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
GraberMark A.1993. “The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary.” Studies in American Political Development7 (1): 35-73.
21.
GrayVirginiaLoweryDavid. 2001. “The Institutionalization of State Communities of Organized Interests.” Political Research Quarterly54 (2): 265-284.
22.
GriffinJohn D. 2006. “Senate apportionment as a source of political inequality.” Legislative Studies Quarterly31 (3): 405-432.
23.
GrumbachJacob M. 2022. Laboratories Against Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
24.
GrumbachJacob M.MichenerJamila. 2022. “American Federalism, Political Inequality, and Democratic Erosion.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences699 (1): 143-155.
25.
HackerJacob S.Hertel-FernandezAlexanderPaulPiersonThelenKathleen. 2022. The American Political Economy: Markets, Power, and the Meta Politics of US Economic Governance. Annual Review of Political Science25: 202.
26.
HackerJacob S.Alexander Hertel-FernandezPaulPiersonThelenKathleen, eds 2021. The American Political Economy: Politics, Markets, and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
HackerJacob S.PiersonPaul. 2010. Winner-Take-All Politics. New York: Simon & Schuster.
28.
HackerJacob. 2002. The Divided Welfare State: The Battle over Public and Private Social Benefits in the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hertel-FernandezAlexander. 2019. State Capture: How Conservative Activists, Big Businesses, and Wealthy Donors Reshaped the American States--and the Nation. Oxford University Press.
31.
HosangDaniel MartinezLowndesJoseph. 2019. Producers, Parasites, Patriots: Race and the New Right-Wing Politics of Precarity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
32.
HuberEvelynRaginCharlesStephensJohn D.. 1993. “Democracy, Christian Democracy, Constitutional Structure and the Welfare State.” American Journal of Sociology99 (3): 711-749.
33.
ImmergutEllen M.1992. “The Rules of the Game: The Logic of Health Policy-Making in France, Switzerland, and Sweden.” Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis4 (1992): 57-89.
34.
JohnsonRichardMillerLisa L. 2022. “The Conservative Policy Bias of US Senate Malapportionment.” PS: Political Science and Politics56 (1): 10-17.
35.
JohnsonRichard. 2020. The End of the Second Reconstruction. London: John Wiley and Sons.
36.
KaufmanRobert R.StephenHaggard. 2019. “Democratic Decline in the United States: What Can We Learn from Middle-Income Countries.” Perspectives on Politics17 (2): 417-ss432.
37.
KeyV.O.1949. Southern Politics in State and Nation. University of Tennessee Press.
38.
KingDesmond S.2017. “Forceful Federalism Against American Racial Inequality.” Government and Opposition52 (2): 356-382.
39.
KingDesmond S.SmithRogers M.. 2005. “Racial Orders in American Political Development.” American Political Science Review99 (1): 75-92.
40.
King DesmondS.SmithRogers M.. 2014. “Without Regard to Race”: Critical Ideational Development in Modern American Politics.” The Journal of Politics76 (4): 958-971.
41.
LeeFrances E.McCartyNolan, eds 2019. Can America Govern Itself?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
LeeFrances E.OppenheimerBruce I.. 1999. Sizing up the Senate: The unequal consequences of equal representation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43.
LevenduskyMatthew. 2023. Our Common Bonds: Using What Americans Share to Help Bridge the Partisan Divide. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
LijphartArend. 2012. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performances in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
45.
LindbloomCharles. 1980. Politics and Markets. New York: Basic Books.
46.
MalhotraNeilRasoConor. 2007. “Racial Representation and U.S. Senate Apportionment.” Social Science Quarterly88 (4): 1038-1048.
47.
McConnellGrant. 1970. Private Power and American Democracy. New York: Knopf.
48.
MettlerSuzanne. 2011. The submerged state: How invisible government policies undermine American democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49.
MichenerJamila. 2018. Fragmented Democracy: Federalism, Medicare, and Unequal Politics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
50.
MillerLisa L.2008. The Perils of Federalism: Race, Poverty, and the Politics of Crime Control. New York: Oxford University Press.
51.
MoroneJames. 1990. The Democratic Wish: Popular Participation and the Limits of American Government. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
52.
OlsonMancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
53.
PiersonPaul. 1995. “Fragmented Welfare States: Federal Institutions and the development of social policy.”Governance8 (4) (1995): 449-478.
54.
RobertsonDavid Brian. 2018. Federalism and the Making of America. 2nd Edition. New York: Routledge.
55.
SamuelsDavidSnyderRichard. 2001. “The Value of a Vote: Malapportionment in Comparative Perspective.” British Journal of Political Science31: 651-671.
56.
SchattschneiderE. E.1960. The Semisovereign People: A Realist’s View of American Democracy. New York: Holt, Reinhart, Winston.
57.
ShapiroIan. Three fallacies concerning majorities, minorities, and democratic politics. NOMOS: American Society of Political and Legal Philosophy1990; 32(79).
58.
StepanAlfredLinzJuan J.. 2011. “Comparative Perspectives on Inequality and the Quality of Democracy in the United States.” Perspectives on Politics9 (4): 841-856.
59.
StrolovitchDara Z.2008. Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
60.
TaylorSteven L.ShugartMatthew S.LijphartArendGrofmanBernard. 2014. A different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. Yale University Press.
61.
ThelenKathleen. 2019. “The American precariat: US Capitalism in Comparative Perspective.” Perspectives on Politics17 (1): 5-27.
62.
ThurstonChloe. 2021. “Racial Inequality, Market Inequality, and the American Political Economy.” In The American Political Economy: Politics, Markets, and Power, edited by HackerJacob S.Hertel-FernandezAlexanderPiersonPaulThelenKathleen eds 2021, ed. Cambridge University Press.
63.
TsebelisGeorge. 1995. “Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism.” British Journal of Political Science25: 289-325.
64.
TsebelisGeorge. 2002. Veto players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
65.
WolakJenniferAdamNewmarkToddMcNoldyLoweryDavidGrayVirginia. 2002. “Much of Politics is Still Local: Multi-State Lobbying in State Interest Communities.” Legislative Studies Quarterly27 (4): 527-555.
66.
ZackinEmily. Looking for Rights in all the Wrong Places. Looking for Rights in All the Wrong Places. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
