Testing the Mandate Model in Britain and the United States: Evidence from the Reagan and Thatcher Eras
Author:
- Terry J. RoyedTRTerry J. Royed
- 27 January 1996
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in British Journal of Political Science
- Vol. 26 (1) , 45-80
Abstract
The hypothesis that parties are better able to carry out mandates in Britain than the United States is tested for the Reagan and Thatcher years. A list of specific pledges was compiled and it was determined whether or not the pledges were fulfilled. The primary finding is that more Conservative party pledges were fulfilled, compared to those of the Republican and Democratic parties in the United States. In each country policy took a conservative turn, but because more pledges were fulfilled in Britain, the ‘Conservative revolution’ was more thorough there than in the United States. It is suggested, in contrast to the findings of previous literature, that institutional differences between the two countries are one factor that matters when it comes to bringing about policy change.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Party Platforms, Mandates, and Government SpendingAmerican Political Science Review, 1993
- The Party Mandate and the Westminster Model: Election Programmes and Government Spending in Britain, 1948–85British Journal of Political Science, 1992
- Mandates and Policy Outputs: U.S. Party Platforms and Federal ExpendituresAmerican Political Science Review, 1990
- Race, Government and Politics in Britain1986
- The British Prime Minister1985
- Are Parliamentary Systems Better?The Brookings Review, 1985
- Do Parties Make a Difference?1984
- Mrs Thatcher’s First Administration1984
- Party Platforms as National PlansPublic Administration Review, 1971
- Party Platforms & Party Performance concerning Social SecurityPolity, 1969